Dave Larson
Non-Partisan | Washington
Candidate Profile
Leans Originalist
BIOGRAPHY
Name
Dave Larson
Party
Non-Partisan
Election Year
2026
Election
Primary
Race
Justice of the Supreme Court, Seat 5
Incumbent
No
Links
EDUCATION
Seattle University School of Law, Seattle, Juris Doctor, 1984
University of Puget Sound, Tacoma, Bachelor of Arts, 1980
WORK & MILITARY
City of Federal Way, Presiding Judge, 2008-present
Federal Way School Board, Board Member/President, 2006-2008
Civil trial lawyer, Trial lawyer, 1985-2008
AFFILIATIONS
District & Municipal Court Judges Association, Member (also member of multiple committees), Civic Learning Council
Board Member, Kiwanis Club of Federal Way, Board Member
Aktion Club of Federal Way, Founder and Advisor, Council on Independent Courts
Member and former co-chair, St Vincent de Paul Parish, Former Chair of Pastoral Council
St Vincent de Paul Parish, Eucharistic Minister, Public Trust & Confidence Committee - Board of Judicial Administration
Former Member, Puget Sound Honor Flight, Guardian
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
Judge, 2008-present
School Board Member - Federal Way Public Schools, 2006-2008
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
(Candidate did not provide)
ENDORSEMENTS
CONSERVATIVE (1)
Republican Women's Club of Mason County
SELECTED CONTRIBUTIONS
CONSERVATIVE
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (1)
Local, County, and District Republican Organizations (2024)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (27)
Local, County, District Republican Organizations (2026)
Amber Krabach (2024)
Andrew Barkis (2024)
Deanna Martinez (2024)
Dino Rossi (2024)
LIBERAL
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (1)
Kevin Schilling (2025)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (4)
Cheryl Hurst (2024)
Forward Party (2024)
International Brotherhood of Teamsters (2024)
Office and Professional Employees International Union (2016)
OTHER INFORMATION
Larson stated that the “single most important reason” to vote for him is his commitment to upholding his oath of office and both the U.S. and Washington State Constitutions. He emphasized judicial restraint, stating that judges should not “legislate from the bench,” and that courts should remain fair, impartial, and separate from political disputes.
In an [un]DIVIDED interview with Brandi Kruse, Larson stated that skin color “is not always irrelevant” and may be relevant where a person’s experiences—such as those of a “Black young male or female or Asian”—influence their behavior. He added that such experiences are relevant to how individuals are treated in the legal system, stating that “a person’s experience is relevant.”
Larson expressed disagreement with the majority in State v. Blake, 197 Wash. 2d 170, 481 P.3d 521 (2021), stating that “the majority’s decision was based on some things that were never argued in the case,” and that “it’s not even fair to the parties to make your decision based on things that were not even argued by the parties.
Larson agreed with McCleary v. State, 173 Wash. 2d 477, 269 P.3d 227 (2012), a Washington Supreme Court decision holding that the State was failing to meet its constitutional duty under article IX, section 1 to fully fund basic education and requiring the Legislature to implement reforms to ensure adequate and equitable school funding. However, Larson stated that “what the Court has done with it since the decision has been made has been disruptive to our system of government and doesn’t solve our education funding issues.” He further stated that the aftermath of the McCleary case became “so extreme” that the Supreme Court was asked to close schools and that one justice even questioned whether the Court could authorize a $28 billion tax increase.
QUESTIONNAIRE
RIGHT TO LIFE
Was Dobbs v. Jackson rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: In Dobbs, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal constitution does not confer a right to abortion.)
Did not answer
Does the federal Constitution support the right to physician assisted suicide? Please explain in light of Washington v. Glucksberg (1997).
Did not answer
Human life deserves legal protection from conception until natural death.
Did not answer
How do you view the judiciary’s role in matters of abortion regulation following Dobbs?
Did not answer
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Do you believe religious liberty is at risk in the United States. If so, what is the judiciary's proper role in addressing this issue?
Did not answer
Does the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment require government to be strictly secular or does it allow for the nation's religious heritage?
Did not answer
Was Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held tha the state may not show religious hostility when enforcing anti-discrimination laws against a business owner.)
Did not answer
VALUES
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Did not answer
What is your understanding of parental rights under the Constitution regarding the upbringing of children, particularly regarding choices about education and sexual identity?
Did not answer
Is gender identity a protected class under the Constitution? Please explain the constitutional basis for your view.
Did not answer
ABOUT YOU
Have you ever been convicted of a felony? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
Have you ever been penalized for sexual misconduct in either civil or criminal court? If so, please explain.
Did not answer
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Describe your judicial philosophy.
Did not answer
Do you believe judges should primarily apply the law according to its original public meaning, or do you believe the law evolves over time to reflect contemporary values?
Did not answer
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Did not answer
Was Obergefell v. Hodges rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses create a right for same-sex couples to marry.)
Did not answer
A. How should a judge approach a case where the constitutional or statutory text is clear on its face? B. Conversely, how should a judge proceed when the text is ambiguous or silent on a disputed issue?
Did not answer
What is your view of judicial restraint versus judicial activism? How do you define each?
Did not answer
What is the proper role of a judge?
Did not answer
When applying or interpreting the text of a statute or constitutional provision, is it ever proper for a judge to consider present day public opinion or consequences?
Did not answer
If precedent departs from the Constitution’s text or original meaning, should a judge follow it or correct the error? Please explain.
Did not answer
CRIMINAL JUSTICE & PUBLIC SAFETY
The burden of proof in a criminal case is generally that the state must provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Some say the reason the burden of proof is so high is because we greatly value ensuring that the innocent are not unjustly imprisoned. Please comment on this topic.
Did not answer
When reviewing wrongful conviction claims, what role, if any, should judges play in determining remedies?
Did not answer
2ND AMENDMENT
What is your understanding of the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms?
Did not answer
OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES
Which branch of government do you believe was intended to wield the most authority?
Did not answer
