Scott Edwards
Non-Partisan | Washington
Candidate Profile
Leans Originalist
BIOGRAPHY
Name
Scott Edwards
Party
Non-Partisan
Election Year
2026
Election
Primary
Race
Justice of the Supreme Court, Seat 1
Incumbent
No
Links
EDUCATION
University of Washington School of Law, Seattle, Washington, JD (with honors), 1988-1991
Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, AB (magna cum laude), 1984-1988
WORK & MILITARY
Ballard Spahr, Partner, 2025-2026
Lane Powell, Partner, 2010-2024
Perkins Coie, Partner, 1999-2010
Bogle & Gates, Senior Attorney, 1996-1999
AFFILIATIONS
American Red Cross - Washington
St. Cecilia Church, Finance Council, Usher, -
Scouting America, Assistant Scoutmaster, 2015-2022
Bainbridge Island Youth Orchestra, Treasurer, 2015-2018
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
None
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Washington State Supreme Court, Position 1, 2026-
ENDORSEMENTS
CONSERVATIVE (1)
Republican Women's Club of Mason County
OTHER INFORMATION
Edwards opposed Washington’s capital gains tax, arguing it functions as an unconstitutional income tax rather than an excise tax. He was part of the legal team representing challengers in the 2021 lawsuit in Douglas County Superior Court, which in 2022 struck down the tax as unconstitutional under the state constitution on the grounds that it operated as a graduated income tax. That decision was later reversed in 2023 by the Washington Supreme Court, which upheld the capital gains tax, and rejecting the challengers’ argument that it was a prohibited income tax.
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.
I am a Catholic and actively involved with my parish.
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.
No
Have you ever been penalized for sexual misconduct in either civil or criminal court? If so, please explain.
No
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
Did not answer
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Describe your judicial philosophy.
I believe that the role of a state Supreme Court justice is to interpret the state constitution and laws as written, not rewrite them.
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?
I believe that the state constitution and laws should be applied according to the plain meaning of the words enacted. Any revisions to either the state constitution or laws should be made by the legislature and/or by the people, following the proper procedure for amending the constitution or law desired to be amended.
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?
A. A judge should apply constitutional or statutory text that is clear on its face in accordance with its plain language. B. An ambiguous statute is one that has more than one reasonable interpretation. When a statute is ambiguous, there are well established principles of statutory interpretation that should be applied to determine which reasonable interpretation is the one that was intended by the drafters of the ambiguous text. If a statute is silent on an issue, the statute does not apply to that issue.
What is your view of judicial restraint versus judicial activism? How do you define each?
I define judicial restraint as interpreting the constitution and statutes as written and adhering to precedent. I define judicial activism as "interpreting" the constitution and statutes in light of the court's views of what the law should be, an approach that I believe is inconsistent with the separation of powers embedded in our system of government.
What is the proper role of a judge?
As mentioned earlier, I believe that the role of a state Supreme Court justice is to interpret the state constitution and laws as written, not rewrite them.
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.
There are well established standards for determining when a precedent that failed to interpret controlling statutory or constitutional language correctly should be overruled. Those standards recognize the importance of predicability and consistency in daily life and the importance of the rule of law in maintaining a civil society; they look to balance those concerns against the recognition that judges are not infallible.
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
