Editorial: Sal Muniga deserves seat on state Supreme Court

By The Herald Editorial Board

For the first time in 12 years, Washington state voters will get the first crack at determining who the next justice of the state Supreme Court will be, rather than seeing that person first appointed by the governor to face election later.

The timing of Justice Susan Owens retirement at the end of this year left the vacancy for the voters to fill, instead of the governor, who had appointed the court’s last three justices, each of whom then won election to the bench. August’s primary election set the general election ballot with Federal Way municipal court Judge David Larson, and trial attorney Sal Mungia. (Two others, Justice Sheryl Gordon McCloud and Chief Justice Steven C. Gonzalez are running unopposed for reelection to their seats.)

Larson has served 16 years as a judge, with 23 years as a trial attorney. He has served on judicial committees, including one on therapeutic courts. He earned his law degree from Seattle University Law School.

Mungia has argued appeals at every level of state and federal courts, as well as the U.S. Supreme Court. He was a former law clerk at the state Supreme Court and federal District Court and is former president of the state bar association. He is an instructor at the Emory School of Law and for the National Institute for Trial Advocacy. He earned his law degree from Georgetown University Law Center.

Both were interviewed separately by the editorial board; ethics rules limit the responses judicial candidates can provide regarding issues that might come before them on the court.

Larson, born in Tacoma and now living in Federal Way, said it was his civil practice that motivated him to run for the Supreme Court. Larson has run for the court twice before, in 2016 and 2020. His experiences as an attorney and judge have convinced him of the need for improvements in court and legal systems.

“There’s so many things we could do better,” Larson said. “And the Supreme Court has been silent. It’s not a priority to help us in our communities. So one of the big issues that I’m running on is is basically trying to get the court to provide some leadership, both for the legislature and elsewhere.”

Larson already has had some success in pushing for reform; a paper he wrote was used in a request before the Legislature to provide $30 million in funding for therapeutic courts, which provide treatment services and judicial supervision in lieu of sentencing for addiction, behavioral health and other issues. He’d like to see programs offered to provide similar services for civil and family courts.

Larson would like to see the state add to existing commissions on minority and gender, a third justice commission on behavioral health that would focus on needs there.

Seeking a nonpartisan position, Larson takes the identification further, insisting he’s neither a conservative nor a liberal and has concerns that both the state Supreme Court and U.S. Supreme Court now are seen as being more politicized.

“The thing you fall in love with as a judge is that nobody cares about your (political) opinion. and they just want you to follow the law and the constitution. I reach out to Democrats and Republicans both,” he said.

Mungia, who describes himself as “a simple Tacoma lawyer,” has not previously served as a judge, noting that “he loves being a lawyer,” hut has friends among the current justices and appreciates what they’ve accomplished.

Mungia said he’s spent his career working to provide access to the courts for those who can’t afford a lawyer, working pro bono and exposing and addressing racial bias and discrimination in the legal system, and he believes he can continue those efforts as a justice.

Mungia is the son of immigrants, a Japanese mother and a Mexican father. Growing up in the ’60s, he said, attuned him to issues of racism.

“My memory goes back to second grade, where I’d see the way that my parents were treated, especially my mom, because she had a heavy Japanese accent,” he said, recalling her hurt and anger when she knew she was being taken advantage of but knew there was nothing to be done.

While the justice system strives against bias and discrimination, Mungia said, it still struggles with bias in sentencing, damages in civil actions, jury selection and the hiring and promotion of court personnel.

An example of his efforts, several years ago he worked with a committee, assembled by the ACLU to look at how some lawyers were getting around rules on how jurors are removed from panels for suspected racial reasons. After five years of work, the committee returned to the state Supreme Court with a proposed rule that makes it more difficult to exclude people of color from juries who are otherwise qualified to serve. The rule was ultimately adopted and has since been used as a model in 15 other states.

Mungia said he’s keen to serve on the Supreme Court, because of its stature among other states. While Washington is ranked 13th for largest population, the state Supreme Court’s opinions are the fifth most cited in other state and federal courts.

“Our state Supreme Court really has been a leader in addressing bias, addressing racism, just having well-reasoned opinions,” he said. The court also, he said, offers a range of viewpoints among the justices; in many decisions, if there aren’t dissenting opinions, they’re are concurrences that will dissent in part.

Voters, with the first open seat in a dozen years, don’t have it easy in choosing between Larson and Mungia. Both are qualified, independent- and fair-minded and seasoned jurists. Both, as well. have already made valuable contributions to the state’s legal system.

Mungia, however, for his recognition of the court’s responsibility to continue to root out and correct discrimination and bias in society and the justice system itself, earns the endorsement and should have voters’ support.