Some Should Be From Our Region

Most of the time, state supreme courts do their work away from the spotlight. The work is dry, complicated, cerebral and important. Which bores a media culture that prefers melodrama: Elian, Monica, O.J.

But when the bright lights do focus on the courts, what kind of people do we want underneath those black robes?

If we were to choose judges the way we choose our politicians, we’d go for well-financed masters of the sound bite. Ideologues, whose prejudices match the latest political fashions.

In fact, judicial races are becoming more politicized.

If we thought about it, though, surely we would prefer judges like Richard P. Guy. In other words, people who are fair-minded. People familiar with the real world but capable in the rarefied world of legal scholarship, as well. People who listen and study before reaching a conclusion.

A few weeks ago Guy announced that he will retire. The letter in which he announced his decision appears elsewhere on this page.

His departure raises significant issues, for Eastern Washington as well as for the state as a whole.

For the state, his retirement sets the stage for a fall election that could reshape our judicial system. Fellow justice Phil Talmadge has announced that he, too, will resign. Two more justices, Gerry Alexander and Bobbe Bridge, likewise will appear on the fall ballot.

Guy is the only justice from Eastern Washington.

What kind of candidates will file for these four races?

Over the past several years, ideological combat flared between two of the court’s members - Talmadge, a former Democratic state legislator, and Richard Sanders, a libertarian. In addition, the cost of judicial campaigns climbed while the professional qualifications of some Supreme Court candidates plummeted.

In this environment Guy served as a moderating influence, calling the court toward a high sense of the professionalism on which its credibility depends. He expanded opportunities for discussion and negotiation among the justices. This did not end disagreement but it did reduce the pressure to vent in the form of written personal attacks. Guy also asked - unsuccessfully, so far - that the Constitution be amended to set minimum experience standards for judicial candidates. And he worked, as his letter shows, to improve funding and administration of the courts.

The bar association - particularly in Eastern Washington - ought to find and encourage candidates of Guy’s caliber.

The Supreme Court must not be a branch office of Seattle’s law firms. Courts and communities differ from one part of the state to another - not in the laws they must obey but certainly in the challenges they face. Courts have a better shot at making decisions that will fit the real world if judges come from different places.

Most important, courts need fair-minded persons on the bench to mediate the tough issues they must resolve. Ideologues can produce sound bites and attract big campaign donations. But the courts need decision makers with open minds, trained in the art of analysis. Let’s hope the coming elections attract candidates worthy of the mantle Guy has worn so well.