Opinion: Supreme Court Position 1 – Fox in the henhouse

Melody's ties to the income tax strategy meeting and $175,519 in fundraising raise independence questions. — Melody’s ties to the income tax strategy meeting and $175,519 in fundraising raise independence questions.

🎧 WA Supreme Court Race: Insider vs. Outsiders

Nancy Churchill discusses the matchup of Ferguson’s AG Insider vs. Real-World Litigators

Nancy Churchill
Dangerous Rhetoric

Washington voters face a critical choice this August. Supreme Court Position 1 is up for a special two-year term. The primary is August 4. Three candidates are on your ballot with the top two advancing to November.

Nancy Churchill

Incumbent Colleen Melody is new to the Supreme Court. The challengers are Scott M. Edwards and Laura Christensen Colberg.

Rural families already battle wolves killing cattle, drought rules choking farms, and taxes squeezing every acre in production and every mile driven. Centralized power in Olympia strangles prosperity and business. The state Supreme Court should check the power of the legislative and executive branches. Instead, it risks becoming just a rubber stamp for progressive politicians. This race shows why voters must pay attention.

The high stakes for property and precedent

The millionaire’s tax — really an income tax — heads toward the Supreme Court. Insiders wrote it to survive the referendum and overturn nearly a century of rulings treating income as protected property under our state constitution. Melody’s ties to that effort run deep. The Washington State Republican Party called for her recusal. Legal watchdogs echo the concern.

Washington’s Code of Judicial Conduct demands a judge step aside when impartiality might reasonably be questioned. A person should not judge her own case. Yet here we stand.

Justice Colleen Melody: Insider with no bench experience

Colleen Melody joined the Washington Supreme Court Jan. 1, 2026, as the 100th justice. Governor Ferguson appointed her two months earlier, even though she had zero judicial experience. She replaced retiring Justice Mary Yu. Before joining the court, she spent eleven years running the Civil Rights Division in the Attorney General’s Office under Ferguson.

Her Civil Rights division challenged Trump policies on the travel ban, transgender military service, birthright citizenship, DACA, and abortion medication. This tells you everything you need to know about Justice Melody’s political leanings.

In September 2025, while still in the Attorney General’s Office, Melody attended a strategy meeting with Sen. Jamie Pedersen, the income tax prime sponsor. Records show it. Critics say the session focused on forcing the Supreme Court to overturn income tax precedent and blocking a people’s referendum. The Attorney General’s Office says it covered different legislation. The appearance of conflict troubles many.

Fundraising tells its own story. Melody pulled in $175,519 so far this cycle. Donors include Solicitor General Noah Purcell, Current AG Nick Brown, and AGO staff. She is the only judicial candidate those officials backed. Every sitting Supreme Court justice, Ferguson, Inslee, and legislators who passed the tax endorse her.

In her voter’s guide statement, Melody says she worked only as a government lawyer protecting civil rights. She’s never worked for a firm, or sent a bill to a client. Her entire work experience is based on sucking on the government teat. Is a lifetime government employee with no judicial experience the best choice for the Supreme Court?

Scott Edwards: Grounded in the Constitution

Scott Edwards offers a clear alternative. This Seattle attorney litigated AGAINST the capital gains tax and AGAINST Seattle’s income tax. He understands these fights from the courtroom floor.

Edwards believes the Supreme Court must remain a place where decisions are grounded in the Constitution, statutes, and precedent. It’s possible to interpret that as potential support for the precedent of previous Supreme Court rulings against a Washington State income tax.

Edwards stands for faithful application of the law, respect for precedent and process, and principled, independent decision making. His campaign frames it simply: “Decisions guided by law and record, never politics or pressure. The court must serve as a fair and balanced check on government, not cheer it on. Independent. Principled. Constitution-oriented.”

His fundraising sits at $29,794 — modest compared to the incumbent, Melody. Yet his record shows real pushback against government overreach. Voters seeking balance should study his site and voter’s guide statement.

Laura Christensen Colberg: Family Law specialist

Laura Christensen Colberg brings 18 years as a pro-tem commissioner in Snohomish County family law court. Pro-tem commissioners are essentially substitute judges, assigned by the elected judges. She is also a practicing family law attorney. She has no ties to the Attorney General’s machine.

She states plainly in her voter’s guide statement: “You do not have to wonder about my decisions. I will not need to consider recusing myself on legislation I helped shape as a governor’s employee.” She proposes that her years of family law practice and adjudication have shaped a unique perspective that is not represented on the current bench.

Her fundraising stands at $22,387. So far, she is self-funding and getting small-dollar donations from family. But her direct challenge to the appearance of conflict matters.

The money gap and the primary math

Justice Melody enjoys a massive fundraising edge — roughly 6-to-1 over her nearest challenger. Establishment muscle backs her fully. Edwards and Colberg split the outsider vote on thinner resources.

Based on the current publicly available information, I’m leaning towards Edwards in this primary. That’s based on his fights against capital gains taxes and his claim to be constitution-oriented. My personal experience with family law courts make me more skeptical of Colberg, the family law expert.

Your move: Research, vote, hold the line

August 4 gives you the first word. Watch the TVW voter guides. Check the PDC reports. Read the Center Square coverage. Ask some simple questions: Can the incumbent justice rule independently on the tax her old team built? Which challenger will be the best choice to beat the incumbent?

Do not let establishment endorsements and big donors decide this race. The people still hold the ultimate check. Attend candidate forums, watch local reporting and talk with engaged neighbors to spread the word about these Supreme Court races. Talk at the feed store. Share at church. Email your circle.

Washington’s initiative power, election process, and rural grit remain strong. Reject the fox guarding the henhouse. Choose judges who guard the Constitution instead.

This primary offers a chance to restore balance. Vote like your property, your liberty, and your grandchildren’s future depend on it. They do.

Nancy Churchill is a writer, educator, and conservative activist in rural eastern Washington state. She chairs the Ferry County Republican Party and advocates for effective citizen influence through Influencing Olympia Effectively. She may be reached at DangerousRhetoric@pm.me. The opinions expressed in Dangerous Rhetoric are her own. Dangerous Rhetoric is available on Substack and X.