Washington Supreme Court to undergo rare reshuffle
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios
Five of the nine seats on the Washington Supreme Court are turning over as major constitutional fights — including a proposed millionaire tax — head toward potential legal challenges.
Why it matters: More than half of the court could be new within a year, giving fresh justices the power to shape how Washington's constitution is interpreted on everything from taxes to civil rights for years to come.
By the numbers: Four Washington Supreme Court seats are already set for the November 2026 ballot — plus a fifth vacancy that will be filled by appointment and then go before voters.
- Position 1: Justice Colleen Melody, appointed by Gov. Bob Ferguson, will run in a special election to finish the term.
- Position 3: Justice Raquel Montoya-Lewis is not seeking re-election.
- Position 4: Justice Charles W. Johnson is ineligible for another term under Washington's mandatory judicial retirement age.
- Position 7: Justice Debra Stephens' term is up.
In addition, Justice Barbara Madsen is retiring effective April 3. Ferguson will appoint her replacement, who must then run to retain the seat in the November general election.
So far, several candidates have publicly disclosed they're running for Johnson's open seat, one has entered the race for Montoya-Lewis' seat, and both Stephens and Melody are expected to defend their seats.
What they're saying: Despite the unusually high turnover, stability will likely reign, according to Hugh Spitzer, an associate dean emeritus and longtime constitutional law professor at the University of Washington.
- "Chief Justice Stephens is a very steady hand and works well with her colleagues," Spitzer told Axios. "I expect that regardless of who is elected, the institution will continue to function nicely, without substantial changes."
- Even if candidates backed by groups seeking more "conservative" voices win seats, he added, "it probably won't make a huge difference in how that body functions internally."
The big picture: Spitzer said the court has generally leaned progressive since the late 1970s, reflecting appointments by former Republican Gov. Dan Evans, though most eras have included libertarian or conservative voices.
- Seattle University constitutional law professor Andrew Siegel described the bench as left-leaning but pragmatic, issuing thoughtful and sometimes groundbreaking rulings — including the Blake decision — that weren't always easy to predict.
Case in point: Among the high-profile disputes that could come before the next iteration of the court is a proposed tax on high earners.
- The state Senate last month approved a measure that would impose a 9.9% tax on annual income above $1 million beginning in 2028.
- Supporters say it would make Washington's tax system less regressive and raise billions for state programs. Republicans — including former AG Rob McKenna — argue it violates the state constitution.
Catch up quick: The legal question traces back to a 1933 ruling in which the Washington Supreme Court held that income is "property," making it subject to the state constitution's requirement that property be taxed uniformly.
- A tax that applies only to income above a set threshold could be found unconstitutional.
- If the Legislature enacts the measure and it survives any initiative or referendum, a lawsuit is widely expected — setting up a high-stakes review by the reshaped court.
What we're watching: How competitive the open-seat races become with more filings expected before the May deadline.