Tom Chambers
From Judgepedia
Contents |
Tom Chambers is an associate justice on the Washington Supreme Court. He was first elected in 2000 and then subsequently re-elected in 2006; his current term expires in 2012. Justice Chambers is considered more liberal in his rulings. In 2006, he was endorsed by the Northwest Progressive Institute.[1]
Chambers was raised in Wapato, Washington.
Legal Background
Chambers attended Yakima Valley Community College, Washington State University, and the University of Washington School of Law. He received his J.D. in 1969.
Legal Career
Prior to winning election to the state's highest court, Chambers practiced law throughout Washington for over 30 years. He was recognized as the state’s outstanding trial lawyer by the only two organizations that made such recognitions at the time: Outstanding Trial Lawyer of the Year - Washington State Trial Lawyers Association, 1989 and Outstanding Trial Lawyer of the Year - American Board of Trial Advocates, Washington Chapter, 1996. Chambers served on boards, taskforces, and committees, including a stint representing the State of Washington on a National Board of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America from 1987 – 1990. He served on the Board of Governors of the Washington State Bar Association in various capacities from 1990 to 1997, and he served as president of four statewide lawyer organizations: Washington State Bar Association; Washington State Trial Lawyers Association; American Board of Trial Advocates, Washington State Chapter; and Damage Attorneys Round Table.[2]
Judicial philosophy
"My parents taught me that solutions to problems should be grounded in common sense. Justice requires openness. My job is to protect your rights. I believe in open government. The brilliance of our constitution is in its checks and balances. The people are the ultimate check on government. Government must be conducted openly and its records must be available for inspection.”[3]
Associations and activities
|
|
2006 campaign
In 2006, Chambers raised $341,625. Chambers himself was the top contributor with $114,992, or 33.66% of the total.[4]
Property tax limit
The Washington Supreme Court ruled in November 2007 that Initiative 747, a Tim Eyman-sponsored property-tax limit, is unconstitutional. This led Gov. Christine Gregoire to ask for a voluntary statewide moratorium on increasing property taxes until the issue is taken up in the next legislative session. Voters approved the measure in 2001 to cap property tax increases at 1 percent a year. King County Superior Court Judge Mary Roberts declared the measure unconstitutional last year, saying it was improperly based on a law that also was thrown out by the courts. In a 5-4 ruling, the court said that even though the voter pamphlet outlined the changes based on the ruling on I-722, "at the time of the operative popular vote, the text of I-747 did not accurately set forth the act revised or the section amended and the text of I-747 misled voters as to the substance of its impact on existing law. A voter reading the text of the initiative could believe that he or she was voting to reduce the property tax limit by 1 percent instead of by 5 percent, a substantially different impact on the public coffers, as well as the perceived benefit to the individual voter's purse," the majority, led by Justice Bobbe Bridge, wrote. Joining her were Justices Susan Owens and Barbara Madsen and two pro-tempore justices, Stephen Brown and Teresa Kulik. Justices James Johnson and Mary Fairhurst recused themselves from the case and were replaced by Brown and Kulik, both appeals court judges. Johnson helped to draft I-747 before he was on the court, and Fairhurst worked for the attorney general's office while the state defended the earlier measure, I-722. "The majority seems to suggest that the voters are unable to think or read for themselves, when in fact our democratic process is based on the assumption that voters do in fact read and understand the impact of their votes," Justice Charles Johnson wrote for the dissent, joined by Chief Justice Gerry Alexander and Justices Tom Chambers and Richard Sanders.[5]
MDs selling medication
In October 2006, Chambers wrote the majority opinion for the court which upheld the right of medical doctors in the state to sell medication. Physicians said the state Supreme Court ruling rejecting a unique interpretation of anti-kickback law in a "fen-phen" diet drug case will preserve access to a number of products for patients. But lawyers in the case say doctors could see more lawsuits trying to use state anti-kickback laws against them. The Washington high court found that the 1949 Washington anti-kickback statute was meant to forbid illegal referrals or "unearned" profits from a third party, but not to prevent doctors from making money off the goods that they provide directly to patients, whether medications or medical equipment. Criminalizing such sales would "lead to absurd consequences," including making patients criminally liable for buying drugs from doctors if the physicians profited from it.[6]
External links
- Tom Chambers: Official biography on supreme court website
- Tom Chambers Campaign website
- Tom Chambers: Opinions and Writings
- Washington Courts: Tom Chambers
- Follow the Money: Tom Chambers 2006
