Brush Prairie resident Bill Eling raises concerns regarding the actions of the commissioner
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and do not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com
Every Washington citizen who values his or her constitutional rights and who is interested in the administration of justice should watch the April 17 hearing conducted by Washington Supreme Court Commissioner Micheal E. Johnston. The hearing relates to a Cowlitz County Superior Court decision in State of Washington v. Gator’s Guns, a case involving the constitutionality of a Washington law banning the sale or import of firearm magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Judge Bashor found that SB 5078, the so-called “large capacity magazine ban” violates both the Second Amendment and Article 1, Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution. His order prohibited the State of Washington from enforcing that law. Commissioner Johnston on April 8 issued a temporary stay of the enforcement of Bashor’s order and set a hearing to consider a permanent stay on April 17.
Every Washington citizen should listen to Commissioner Johnston explain how he started formulating his decision weeks before the Cowlitz judge issued his ruling, explain how he had done his own research on the facts, explain why he didn’t need to closely read the Superior Court’s 55-plus page decision or the State’s 35-plus page motion before reaching his conclusion, and explain how his own personal experience and research supported his decision to issue the temporary stay.
Every Washington citizen should see how Commissioner Johnston treated Gator’s attorney, Austin Hatcher. Pay attention to the Commissioner’s lower lip as he addressed Hatcher. Compare it to how he treated the State attorney general. Every Washington citizen should assess for themselves whether Commissioner Johnston appeared objective and unbiased. Every Washington citizen should count how many times the Commissioner both interrupted Hatcher’s presentation to argue with him and how many times he then reminded Hatcher that his time was running out.
Commissioner Johnston also related that he had received vulgar phone messages and emails over the temporary stay. Such behavior is unacceptable and could be a crime. A better outlet, especially given Johnston’s statements in the April 17 hearing, would be a complaint to the State of Washington Commission on Judicial Conduct. The CJC address is Commission on Judicial Conduct, P.O. Box 1817, Olympia, Washington 98507. The CJC website has instructions on filing a complaint and explains its jurisdiction.
When you watch the hearing, you should watch it knowing how judicial officials such as Commissioner Johnson are supposed to act. If you find this hearing disturbing, here are a couple of potential Code violations you could put in a complaint.
Washington Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.9(C) states “A judge shall not investigate facts in a matter pending or impending before that judge, and shall consider only the evidence presented and any facts that may properly be judicially noticed, unless expressly authorized by law.” Comment 5 to Rule 2.9 states: “The prohibition against a judge investigating the facts in a manner extends to information available in all mediums, including electronic.”
Washington Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.11(A) states: “A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances (1) The judge has . . .personal knowledge of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding.” Comment 2 to Rule 2.11 states: “A judge’s obligation not to hear or decide matters in which disqualification is required applies regardless of whether a motion to disqualify is filed.” Note that “shall” creates a mandatory obligation.
Here’s the link to the hearing. Watch the whole thing. You decide. I have. Washington State Supreme Court Commissioner Hearing – TVW at https://tvw.org/video/washington-state-supreme-court-commissioner-hearing-2024041132/?eventID=2024041132
Bill Eling
Brush Prairie
Also read:
- Letter: For the public record and the Comprehensive Plan
In a July 12 letter to the Clark County Council, Clark County Citizens United President Susan Rasmussen shares that primary stakeholders were ignored in the Wetland and Habitat Ordinance Conservation Covenant. - Opinion: Supreme Court gives Vancouver a new tool to use in its homelessness efforts, but will the city use it?
Most Vancouver residents do not want homelessness to be criminalized but they do want a response when some in the homeless community commit crimes, and a new ruling by the United States Supreme court is a tool the city could use to help neighborhoods. - Opinion: Has transit entered the “death spiral?”
Transit ridership dropped sharply with the onset of the COVID pandemic in 2020. The slow rebound in the years that followed has prompted discussion, sometimes in hushed tones, as to whether transit had entered a “death spiral.” - POLL: Should the city of Vancouver do more to protect citizens who have been victims of harassment, or worse, from those living homeless on the streets?Should the city of Vancouver do more to protect citizens who have been victims of harassment, or worse, from those living homeless on the streets?
- Opinion: How bad is freeway speeding?Target Zero Manager Doug Dahl answers a question about the commonplace of freeway speeding in Washington state.
wpDiscuz
