Candidate Info
Candidate Name: Tricia Grove Johnson
Position Sought: King County District Court ( Position 3)
Are you an incumbent for this position? No
[ This will be an open seat. ]
Home Legislative District: 5th
Campaign Info
Campaign Manager or Point of Contact: Mary Ann Ottinger
Mailing Address:
The Tricia Grove Johnson Committee
P.O. Box 27113
Seattle, WA 98165
Phone 425-466-0619
Email: grovejohnsonforjudge [at] gmail.com
Part I – Candidate Background
1. Please describe your qualifications, education, employment, past community and civic activity, as well as any other relevant experience.
For nearly 30 years, I’ve dedicated my career to serving the people of our community—as a Public Defender, Chief Prosecuting Attorney, and since 2018 as a Judge Pro Tem in courts throughout King and Pierce Counties. I am proud to be a graduate of the University of Washington and Seattle University School of Law, and I’ve had the privilege of presiding over a wide range of criminal and civil matters, including numerous jury trials. I helped the City of Auburn build its Community Court, working alongside city leaders, law enforcement. judges, and service providers connecting people with the resources they need to stabilize and succeed.
Community service has always been a core part of who I am. I’ve served on the Renton Domestic Violence Task Force and the Blake Advisory Committee, and I’ve enjoyed leading the Maple Valley Rotary as Past President. I’ve also worked with the Friends Project to help connect first responders with members of our special‑needs community—an effort that means a great deal to me. One of the accomplishments I’m particularly proud of is helping raise more than one million dollars for cancer research at Fred Hutch and the Pete Gross House.
2. What prompted you to run for this office?
I believe now is the time to step up. Challenging time to be alive but an amazing opportunity to be of service. Throughout my career, my commitment has always been the same: to serve with compassion, integrity, and respect for every person who comes before the court.
3. What do you believe are the most important qualifications for a judge or justice?
Integrity, fairness, and substantial legal experience; a judicial temperament grounded in respect, patience, and professionalism; a demonstrated commitment to public service and the justice system; accessibility to justice; and an ability to make decisions independently, consistently, and with respect for every person who comes before the court.
4. What priorities are you seeking to address with your campaign?
My focus is on maintaining a courtroom that is accessible, efficient, and grounded in the rule of law and with opportunity to succeed. I prioritize integrity, impartiality, and consistency in decision‑making, guided solely by the facts, the law, and the constitutional rights of all individuals. I also believe strongly in improving the public’s ability to navigate the justice system, supporting problem‑solving approaches, and upholding transparency and accountability in judicial processes. Above all, my goal is to serve the community by ensuring justice is administered fairly, respectfully, and without bias and to provide all persons with an opportunity to stabilize and succeed.
5. What is the code of conduct for your campaign?
I am committed to running a judicial campaign that reflects the integrity and neutrality expected of the bench. I will conduct all campaign activities with honesty, accuracy, and respect for the dignity of the judiciary. I will not make promises about how I would rule in any case, nor will I engage in partisanship or statements that undermine public trust in the courts. My campaign will follow all judicial ethics rules, including appropriate fundraising practices, and I will maintain independence from any outside influence that could compromise or appear to compromise my impartiality. Above all, I will engage the community in a manner that demonstrates fairness, respect, and a commitment to equal justice for every person. My campaign will be guided by the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Part II – Access to Justice
1. If elected, how will you work to improve access to justice, particularly for communities and constituencies that do not understand the American legal system?
If elected, I will work to improve access to justice by ensuring that every person who comes before the court—regardless of background, language, or familiarity with the legal system—can understand the process and meaningfully participate in it. I will use plain, clear language in the courtroom to explain procedures and rulings, and I will make sure that interpreters, accommodations, and accessible resources are consistently available when needed. I am committed to fostering a courtroom environment where individuals feel respected and heard, and where cultural, linguistic, and socioeconomic barriers are recognized and addressed. I will continue supporting programs that help the public navigate the justice system, including self‑help resources, problem‑solving courts, and community‑based outreach efforts that build trust and understanding of the legal process. Above all, I will approach each case with patience, respect, and a commitment to ensuring that justice is understandable, accessible, and equitable for every member of our community.
2. Is Washington relying too much on court fees to cover the cost of operating our judicial system? How do you believe our courts should be funded?
Washington’s courts should be fair, accessible, and open to everyone, and that means the cost of participating in the justice system should not fall disproportionately on the individuals who use it. Court fees can create barriers—especially for low‑income people—and can unintentionally discourage individuals from fully engaging with the legal process. Courts are a core function of government, and their funding should primarily come from stable, predictable public sources rather than from the parties who appear before them. A reliable funding system supports timely case processing, adequate staffing, interpreter services, and technology that improves access for all. As a judge, my role is not to set funding policy, but I strongly support the principle that the justice system should be funded in a way that ensures fairness, accessibility, and equal treatment under the law.
3. Would you, if elected, bring restorative justice as a goal to your court room? If yes, describe how that could look.
Yes. I strongly support the principles of restorative justice. Restorative approaches are useful tools within the existing legal framework, especially in cases where they enhance accountability, promote rehabilitation, stability, and improve community safety without compromising the rights of any party. In practice, this can include offering diversion opportunities when authorized, supporting problem‑solving courts or therapeutic courts such as community court, and encouraging processes that help individuals understand the impact of their actions. It also means ensuring that victims’ voices are heard and that all participants are treated with dignity and respect. My goal is to apply restorative practices carefully, ethically, and within the boundaries of judicial discretion—always guided by the law, the facts of each case, and the overarching duty to ensure fairness and justice for everyone involved.
4. What ideas can you offer to make our judicial system more open, transparent, and responsive?
Judicial openness and transparency are essential to maintaining public trust, and there are several ways courts can strengthen these values while remaining within the bounds of judicial ethics. First, I believe in using clear, plain language in the courtroom so parties understand procedures, rulings, and their rights—this alone can make the system feel far more accessible. Second, I support consistent use of interpreters, ADA accommodations, and self‑help resources to reduce barriers for individuals who may not otherwise be able to navigate the process. Third, I will maintain a courtroom that is respectful, patient, and predictable, so people feel heard and understand what to expect. I also support the responsible use of technology—such as remote appearances or publicly available online information about proceedings—to help individuals more easily access the system. Most importantly, I am committed to treating every person with fairness, dignity, and respect, and responding to the needs of the community while upholding the law and protecting the rights of all involved.
5. What are your thoughts on how our courts could permanently incorporate virtual options for court hearings?
Virtual court options have become an important tool for expanding access to justice, and I believe they should remain available where they improve fairness and efficiency without compromising due process or the rights of any party. Virtual appearances can reduce barriers for people who face challenges with transportation, mobility, work schedules, childcare, or safety concerns. When permitted by court rules and appropriate for the type of hearing, remote participation can make it easier for individuals, attorneys, and witnesses to appear on time and fully engage in the process. At the same time, it is essential to preserve in‑person hearings for matters that require direct testimony, credibility assessments, or situations where a remote format could disadvantage any party. A permanent hybrid model—using virtual technology thoughtfully and consistently while maintaining strong in‑person options—can help courts remain accessible, efficient, and responsive to the needs of the community.
6. Justice delayed is justice denied, what are your thoughts on how to catch up on the current backlog of cases awaiting trail? Additionally what changes to the current court system would you implement to ensure speedy justice?
A backlog of cases can erode public confidence in the courts, so reducing delays is essential to delivering fair and timely justice. The first priority is to ensure that cases are managed efficiently from the moment they enter the system. This includes clear scheduling orders, early identification of cases that can be resolved through settlement conferences or mediation and ensuring that procedural issues are addressed quickly so cases don’t stall unnecessarily. When appropriate, virtual hearings can also help reduce delays by making it easier for parties, attorneys, and witnesses to appear on time.
I also support a triage‑based approach that prioritizes cases requiring immediate attention—such as those involving personal liberty, vulnerable individuals, or urgent civil matters—while moving less complex cases through streamlined processes. Improving court staffing levels, such as clerks and judicial officers, is also an important administrative support that helps keep cases moving. Within the courtroom, I am committed to maintaining steady, predictable calendars, starting on time, issuing clear written orders, and resolving legal questions efficiently so parties can prepare without unnecessary delay.
Ultimately, ensuring speedy justice requires consistency, preparation, and respect for everyone’s time. By combining thoughtful calendar management, appropriate use of technology, and a disciplined approach to case progression, courts can reduce backlogs while still protecting fairness, due process, and each party’s right to be fully heard.
7. What judicial reforms do you support to achieve greater equity and inclusion for BIPOC individuals in our communities?
Courts have a responsibility to ensure that every person is treated fairly, respectfully, and without bias, and this includes working to address the barriers and disparities that BIPOC community members often experience in the legal system. Within the boundaries of judicial ethics, there are several reforms and practices I support. First, I believe in expanding access to interpreters, ADA services, and plain‑language explanations of court procedures so that people can meaningfully participate in their cases. Second, the courts should continue supporting training on implicit bias, cultural humility, and trauma‑informed practices so judicial officers and staff are better equipped to recognize and reduce disparities in courtroom interactions. Third, consistent use of clear scheduling, accessible virtual options where appropriate, and predictable case management can help reduce the procedural burdens that disproportionately impact communities with fewer resources. Finally, I support data‑informed approaches—consistent with privacy protections—that help courts identify patterns that may reveal inequitable outcomes, so we can respond through improved practices, resources, or training. My role as a judge is to apply the law fairly and impartially, and these court‑centered reforms help ensure that fairness is both real and felt by every person who comes before the court.
By typing my name below, I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct.
Tricia Grove Johnson
2/3/2026
