Greg Zempel

Greg Zempel

Education

Bachelor's

University of Washington

Law

University of Puget Sound School of Law, 1989

Greg Zempel is the prosecutor in Kittitas County, Washington. He was a 2016 candidate for the Washington State Supreme Court. He ran against incumbent Chief Justice Barbara Madsen. Zempel was defeated.

Zempel stated that he ran because the state supreme court is "unpredictable." He said, "[The court is] highly politicized and they are not deferential to other branches of the government or citizens." Zempel said that he decided to challenge Chief Justice Madsen rather than a justice who had been on the court for less time because the chief justice was "more responsible" for the tone of the court.

Education

Zempel received his bachelor's degree from the University of Washington and his J.D. from the University of Puget Sound School of Law in 1989.

Career

• January 1995-Present: Prosecutor, Kittitas County, Washington
• 1992-December 1994: Deputy Prosecutor, Kittitas County, Washington

Political affiliation

Zempel has served his terms as the elected prosecutor of Kittitas County as a Republican.

Elections

2016

Zempel filed to run for the Washington State Supreme Court, Position 5, challenging incumbent Barbara Madsen alongside John Scannell. The three faced each other in a primary on August 2. Zempel and Madsen defeated Scannell in the August 2 primary and advanced to the November 8 general election.

Election results

November 8 general election

Incumbent Barbara Madsen defeated Greg Zempel in the general election for the Washington Supreme Court, Position 5.

Washington Supreme Court, Position 5, 2016
Candidate	Vote %	Votes
Barbara Madsen Incumbent	61.95%	1,679,786
Greg Zempel	38.05%	1,031,698
Total Votes (100% reporting)		2,711,484
Source: Washington Secretary of State Official Results

August 2 primary

Washington Supreme Court Primary, Position 5, 2016
Candidate	Vote %	Votes
Barbara Madsen Incumbent	63.90%	759,475
Greg Zempel	29.71%	353,149
John Scannell	6.38%	75,849
Total Votes (2000 of 2000 reporting: 100%)		1,188,473
Source: Washington Secretary of State Official Results

Race background

The 2016 election was the first since the 1990s in which all three state supreme court justices up for re-election faced opponents. At least one justice in every election typically runs unopposed, but this year all three incumbents drew challengers. Republican state Representative Matt Manweller said he and other lawmakers actively recruited candidates to run against the justices. This was partly because of the court's decisions in the long-running school funding case McCleary v. Washington, over which the court drew criticism from both Republicans and Democrats for holding the state in contempt of court, and in a separate case about the state funding of charter schools.

Those in favor of replacing the justices said the court has overstepped its boundaries into legislation and policymaking and failed to respect the autonomy of the state legislature. In the McCleary school funding case, the court both found the state government in contempt and fined the state $100,000 per day until the state complied with the court's orders.

In a separate case, the court ruled unconstitutional the state funding of charter schools right before those schools were set to open in 2015.

Satellite spending

The political action committee arm of the group Stand for Children spent $116,000 promoting the campaign of Greg Zempel, who challenged Chief Justice Barbara Madsen for her seat on the court. Madsen authored the court's 2015 decision declaring Washington's charter schools, in their form at that time, unconstitutional. The legislature passed a new bill in 2016 that allowed charter schools to continue; opponents threatened to sue over this law as well. Stand for Children's spending on Zempel's campaign was funded by several of the backers of charter schools who were opposed to the court's 2015 decision. The primary donors include Connie Ballmer, wife of former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer; Reed Hastings, founder and CEO of Netflix; and Vulcan Inc., owned by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen. Vulcan and Ballmer were also among the primary backers of the ballot initiative that paved the way for the charter schools.

Greg Zempel on his candidacy

The Queen Anne & Magnolia News published a Q&A with Zempel on his candidacy.

When asked why he is running for the Washington Supreme Court, Zempel replied:

“

I've been an elected prosecutor for 22 years, a prosecutor for 24, and a defense attorney before that for a couple of years. And over the years, I've just become more frustrated with the rulings of the court and in particular, Barbara Madsen. As a prosecutor, I’ve always put the emphasis on victims and communities, and time and again I’ve seen our court hand down opinions that really favor defendants to the detriment of victims. The second part of that is that law enforcement needs to have a court that gives clear guidelines so that we know where we’re going and what we can do. The constitution’s always that bedrock that says, ‘Here are your limitations on law enforcement,’ and I say 99.9 percent of police and prosecution want to do the job correctly, but the court needs to be consistent in what they’re doing, and too often what we see is a court that will change case law and precedent—25-30 years that we’ve done it in a particular fashion, and boom, it’s overturned. A case that really hits both of those points is IN RE: PRP of Andress (2002). It was a felony murder case where Justice Madsen was looking at felony murder statute, thought it was not fair, that it didn’t require a mental element. There’s a felony, someone’s killed, you’re guilty. She describes it as looking at the fairness component of that. Looking around and reading treatises on felony murder, and then looking around the country and seeing that only three other states did it like Washington. Rather than drawing the conclusion and saying, well, you know, it’s lawful to do it this way, what she said instead was we believe—and again her opinion—we believe that the legislation never intended to include an assault in a felony murder. So 35 years of prosecutors, law enforcement officers, trial court judges, defense attorneys, thinking this was law, including the legislature, boom, changed with the stroke of a pen. The legislature immediately in a special session said, "This is wrong, it was always intended, it’s never not been intended, and we affirm it was intended." The consequence was that 385 individuals convicted of felony murder were then turned back to the trial courts to sort out what you can do with them now. That’s one of the cases, but that emphasizes what’s been happening with this court.

”

When asked what he has learned as a prosecutor that will help him on the supreme court:

“

This is another contrasting view between myself and Justice Madsen. I’ve been elected six terms as a prosecuting attorney in Eastern Washington. My party affiliation is a matter of record, I don’t run from it but don’t talk about it because this is a nonpartisan race. But in those 22 years, I’ve always run the office in a nonpartisan fashion, because at the end of the day if you come before me, or your case comes into my office, do you want me to care if you’re a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or independent? Absolutely not. And does our form of government say that that should be an issue? No. And does our constitution say treat people differently? No. On all those counts it says everyone coming into the criminal justice system needs to be treated fairly. Lady Justice is blind so she doesn’t know those things, right? So in 22 years of doing that I have learned that when I take that oath and swear to uphold the constitution of our state and federal government and the laws of this name, that I’m expected to do that job in a nonpartisan fashion and I have done that, and that’s why I continue to be reelected in a county that is Republican and Democrat and independents and Libertarians, and at the end of the day I think that’s what I bring to this court. I don’t have agendas, I don’t have people that get special treatment or privileges. In fact, I’ve had the opportunity to prosecute people who have given me money for campaigns, prosecute people who’ve endorsed me, prosecute elected officials and their kids, that’s just what you do when you take that oath, so I would bring that to the state supreme court, recognizing that at the end of the day my job is to be neutral, to be nonpartisan, to not have agendas and not be a policymaker.

”

When asked about his distinctions between his philosophy and that of his opponent, incumbent Chief Justice Barbara Madsen:

“

The distinctions I think are in the function of what the court is. And I’ve heard her now speak and she’s spoken upon the authority of the court. So in McCleary, for example, we wrote an editorial and she was being asked about whether or not the criticisms that the court was doing the job of the legislature were fair, and whether or not one branch of government should do the work of another branch of government. Her response was, in a vacuum, no, but if one branch is not doing what it is supposed to do, and another branch is dealing with it, then it’s acceptable. The second part of that was an interview she did on TVW with Austin Jenkins shortly after the state of the judiciary address she had given. She was also being asked at that point in time about whether or not she thought the court could go too far in terms of what they were doing for remedies on McCleary, and her response was, “No, I don’t think so, when you’re talking about making the plaintiffs in this case whole.” So I guess the clear distinction is that I very much believe that our constitution set up independent and equal branches of government, that there are limitations upon each of the others.

”

When asked what concern he hears most from people on the campaign trail:

“

The biggest concern, the biggest issue that people have is that they don’t believe that the average citizen can get a fair shake in the court. They think that the court is very political, they think that it is not a fair and balanced court. They believe that when you get there, you’re not going to be on equal footing, that Lady Justice is not blind, that she has the blindfold up, and when you get there, it depends on who you’re going against whether you have a shot or not, and that’s just wrong.

”

When asked about the biggest challenge of the campaign:

“

I would say there’s actually two, one’s practical and one’s more nebulous. So the practical level, we are way down the ballot, no one pays attention to the supreme court justice races, no one likes to fund Supreme Court justice races, no one necessarily wants you to invite you to come and speak as a supreme court justice and so we tell everyone, it doesn’t matter who you are, if you want to hear about the court, you want to hear about issues, we’ll come, we’ll show up. Which means you put a lot of miles on your beat, like 4,000 miles one month.... The second is the issue of narratives. Some of the chief justice’s supporters, it’s very interesting how these things roll out, but for example, the narrative that gets played out that you then find yourself addressing is, well this is just this white conservative eastern Washington individual who just wants to overdo all good works and is probably racist.... The perception that I’ve heard that I’m somehow anti-diversity, as an example, just floors me, because my family itself is very diverse. My nephew is African American, my sister’s long-term boyfriend is his father. We have a foster boy who’s Hispanic. My staff of attorneys, we have more females than we have males, so it’s just funny, the narrative that gets painted because of where you start your campaign from, being a white prosecutor from eastern Washington, so you spend a lot of time talking about that, which is really silly in some ways. On the other hand, you can also understand it. It’s like, in the absence of knowledge, take what’s easy. So that’s the biggest challenge.

”

When asked to answer "in 30 seconds" why voters should vote for him:

“

I think I bring a diversity to the court, both geographically, prosecutorially, as a defense attorney I’m the only candidate that has any long term criminal experience, the only candidate that’s spent half their life on the west side, half their life on the east side. Eight of the nine justices all live and come from the greater Seattle area. Their perspective is narrow. I think a bring a background that would be much different than that. And I bring a background that starts with the notion that all people should be treated fairly under our constitution and in front of this court.

”

Zempel and Madsen on issues

The Yakima Herald published a set of answers given by Chief Justice Barbara Madsen and her challenger, Greg Zempel, to questions that included the primary salient issue of the election: the court's handling of the McCleary case.

On the McCleary case:

“

Question: How do you reconcile the court’s role as legal interpreter with the Legislature’s policy-making role, particularly as it applies to cases such as McCleary? Barbara Madsen: "I know that my opponent likes to say that the court is becoming too political. I think it's important for people to remember that the Supreme Court and the trial courts—none of the courts reach out into the community to try to take issues that they think somehow need the touch of the court. Every single issue that comes to the court comes because a plaintiff brought the issue to a court. ... Necessarily, these cases will touch on issues that have a political aspect to them. The three branches of the government, none of us work in a vacuum. Our drafters designed a system of governance that includes the three branches. And governance is all about politics, right? ... And at the end of the day, with a case like McCleary, if people cannot come to court to get redress against their government, which is guaranteed under the constitution, then where do they go?" Greg Zempel: "One legislative body does not have the ability to bind future legislative bodies. ... In this particular case, the court said, 'We're going to retain jurisdiction. You have until 2018 to cure your contempt for not doing what you're supposed to do. And because we as a body don't believe you're going to do the job, we're going to keep checking in on you, and we're going to keep imposing sanctions, we're going to keep holding hearings.' ... They have basically told the Legislature, 'You adopted this plan and we're not going to let you change this plan unless there's an educational basis to do so.' But then they're the ones who decide whether there's an educational basis put forward by the Legislature or not. So in essence they're being told, 'You can't change your legislation.'"

”

On the regional balance of the court:

“

The issue: Of the nine justices on the state Supreme Court, only one, Justice Debra Stephens of Spokane, was elected while living in Eastern Washington. Both candidates for this seat on the court believe diversity among justices is important, but they differ on whether place of residence is an important factor in reaching that diversity. Question: Is it important to have increased Eastern Washington representation on the state Supreme Court? Why or why not? Madsen: "Diversity of experience is really important to any appellate court, because we do collaborate. That's the whole purpose of an appellate court is that it's made up of multi-members who bring something to the table that the others perhaps don't have in their experience either as lawyers or in life experience .... But do I think we need a representative from Eastern Washington? No. ... Representation is not the point of a court. It's experiences, both life and legal that bring richness to the fabric of a court." Zempel: "Right now we have eight of nine justices who are basically from the greater Seattle area.... If you all agree at the outset of your conversation, based upon the fact that you have all lived a common, similar life, then your discussion points are much different than if you broaden that up and bring in people who have different perspectives on the same issue. ... They have a much different perspective on the interaction of state agencies with local government. ... So I think when you talk about diversity, there's also a need for diversity of thought, which comes from geographic representation."

”

Endorsements

All of the following endorsements are listed on Greg Zempel's campaign website.

• Association of Washington Business
• Association of General Contractors
• Stand.Org
• Washington State Farm Bureau
• Washington State Dairy Pac
• We Believe - We Vote
• 30th Legislative District Republicans
• Washington Food Industry Association
• Washington Retail Association
• Law Enforcement Administrators of Washington
• Former Republican Senator Slade Gorton
• Former Republican Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna
• Current Republican Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman
• Former Republican Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed
• Retired Washington State Supreme Court Justice Jim Johnson

Campaign finance

Greg Zempel Campaign Finance, 2016
Contributions	Expenditures	Cash on Hand	Debt
$85,032	$42,943	$42,089	$5,000
Source:	Washington Public Disclosure Commission

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Washington Greg Zempel. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Greg Zempel - Google News

See also

• Washington State Supreme Court
• Judicial selection in Washington

External links

• Greg Zempel for Supreme Court Justice

Footnotes

Washington courts

---

Federal courts:

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Eastern District of Washington, Western District of Washington • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Eastern District of Washington, Western District of Washington

State courts:

Washington Supreme Court • Washington Court of Appeals • Washington Superior Court • Washington District Courts • Washington Municipal Courts

State resources:

Courts in Washington • Washington judicial elections • Judicial selection in Washington