In her decade of building the state attorney general’s office’s civil rights division, Colleen Melody litigated cases in at least 20 Washington state counties, at all levels of appeals courts, and within myriad corners of law. Now, as she runs to defend her Jan. 1 appointment to the Washington Supreme Court, Melody is the Position 1 race’s best candidate, demonstrating a deep knowledge of the state’s labyrinthine legal system.
Melody, 43, is a meticulous lawyer with an impressive curiosity and passion for even the smallest and most technical details. A Mariners fan who says she still keeps score by hand during games, Melody was prepared for deep discussions on most every case the editorial board initiated, unlike her opponents.
A Spokane native, Melody developed the attorney general’s office’s civil rights division, including having a direct hand in successfully challenging the Trump administration’s travel ban on those from Muslim-majority countries. Gov. Bob Ferguson, also her boss when he was attorney general, picked her to replace Justice Mary Yu earlier this year.
Her colleagues have no doubts about Melody’s abilities either, as she’s earned endorsements from the entire Supreme Court bench, as well as retired justices Yu, Barbara Madsen, Gerry Alexander and Bobbe Bridge.
A member of the court’s rules committee, Melody is also making good on the necessary promise to shed more light and bring more public involvement into the court’s work, including on bail reform.
Melody faces Scott Edwards, a partner at Seattle’s Ballard Spahr law firm and an adjunct tax law professor at the University of Washington; and Laura Christensen Colberg, a family law attorney and Snohomish County pro tem court commissioner.
Her opponents cast two main complaints about Melody, neither of which are credible. Colberg takes issue with Melody’s many Democratic endorsers, including Gov. Ferguson; yet Melody’s brushes with high ranking members of other branches of government aren’t unavoidable as a longtime public service attorney. She can, and should, recuse herself when conflicts of interest arise; but having experience with high profile cases is an asset, not a liability.
Edwards takes issue with the courts’ many gubernatorial appointees serving on the court, all having been selected by Democrats for more than 40 years. That criticism rings true but is no fault of Melody’s. He also believes the court has deviated from its role in following precedent into making legislative-like policy, but couldn’t furnish much evidence of that behavior to the editorial board.
Melody defended the court’s practices and denied they’ve veered into the legislative branch.
“Of course the court should stay in its lane, and not veer into policy, unnecessarily,” Melody told the editorial board.
She indeed lists many endorsements from Democrats active in state politics. If elected to the court, she should use extra caution from the bench, and off it, to weigh cases apolitically — so she does not risk an appearance, perceived or real, that she is in the pocket of the Democratic establishment.
Still, her skill is unmatched in the race.
As retired Justice Yu once said, the court is “nine people duking it out,” to reach its legal opinions. Melody possesses a sharp intellect and deep legal knowledge that are necessary for anyone serving as a member of the state’s highest court. She’s the most qualified of those running for the Position 1 seat.
