Judicial Questionnaire – 2026 Revision
Candidate Info
Candidate Name: Theo Angelis
Position Sought: WA Supreme Court Position 5
Are you an incumbent for this position? Incumbent
Home Legislative District: 36th LD
Campaign Info
Campaign Manager or Point of Contact: Kaleb Nichols
List social media sites: justiceangelis.com, instagram.com/justiceangelis, https://www.facebook.com/justiceangelis, https://www.linkedin.com/in/theoangelis
Part I – Candidate Background
1. Please describe your qualifications, education, employment, past community and civic activity, as well as any other relevant experience.
I have completed my first term on the Washington Supreme Court, and before joining the Court, I spent over 25 years as an award winning appellate, constitutional, and complex litigator. I also was a law clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, assisting with resolution of complex and high-profile disputes involving the U.S. government.
I graduated summa cum laude from Claremont McKenna College, earned two Master’s Degrees as a British Marshall Scholar (from Oxford University and the London School of Economics), and received my J.D. from Yale Law School.
After law school, I served as a law clerk to the Honorable Stephen F. Williams on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
I spent 26 years in private practice at K&L Gates LLP, where I led the firm's Appellate practice and more recently served as global leader of its Intellectual Property practice. My practice involved regularly appearing before state and federal appellate and trial courts.
My legal experience is exceptionally broad. I have represented individuals and governments in civil rights cases. I have represented Tribes and municipalities in complex disputes involving treaties and jurisdiction. I have represented technology companies in fighting online crime and protecting children and consumers. I have represented some of the more sophisticated technology companies in the world in disputes regarding the use of patented technologies. Perhaps most importantly, however, I devoted a large part of my time to pro bono representation of refugees, immigrants, veterans, children, and those experiencing homelessness.
For more than a decade, I served as the Editor-in-Chief of the Washington Lawyers Practice Manual (WLPM), a treatise utilized by thousands of attorneys and lay people across our state, sales of which fund the Neighborhood Legal Clinics.
I also have been a leader in the bar, serving as President of the Middle Eastern Legal Association of Washington and of the Federal Bar Association of the Western District of Washington and also serving as a Trustee of the King County Bar Association and Chair of its Fair Campaign Practices Committee.
2. What prompted you to run for this office?
I am running to retain my seat on the Washington State Supreme Court because I believe that a fair, independent, and efficient judiciary is the bedrock of a healthy society.
Having spent 26 years analyzing the state and federal laws that come before the Washington Supreme Court, and advocating for vulnerable communities, I want to ensure our state’s highest court continues to protect constitutional rights, expand access to justice, and faithfully apply the law to every person in Washington, regardless of their background or wealth.
3. What do you believe are the most important qualifications for a judge or justice?
I believe that a fundamental commitment to fairness is possibly the most important qualification for a judge. Beyond legal expertise and intellectual rigor, a justice must possess the humility to recognize that the law is not abstract: it deeply affects real people, families, and communities. As interpreters of the law, our primary obligation is to maintain impartiality and independence and ensure that every litigant receives a fair hearing regardless of background or resources. This requires balancing a faithful adherence to precedent and constitutional principles with an acute awareness of the practical, real-life implications our decisions have on Washingtonians. Ultimately, a judge must approach each case with an open mind, a commitment to equity, and the courage to uphold justice in a way that preserves public trust and strengthens the rule of law.
4. What priorities are you seeking to address with your campaign?
1. Expanding Access to Justice
Too many Washingtonians cannot afford access to the legal system. I am focused on trying to achieve meaningful change in the ability of individuals to bring claims when they have been harmed, a lessening of financial obligations the courts impose on litigants, greater financial and administrative support for witnesses and jurors (including access to child care and fair pay), and strengthening language access and civil legal aid. I also have been working with the WSBA to build innovative ways to expand access to legal services so long as they are rolled out carefully and with strong consumer protections.
2. Protecting the Independence and Integrity of the Judiciary
Public confidence in the courts is essential to democracy and the rule of law. I am committed to ensuring that courts remain independent, thoughtful, transparent, and grounded in careful legal analysis rather than political pressure or ideology. I am working on initiatives to increase public visibility of our judges, and their important work.
3. Ensuring Fairness and Equal Treatment in the Legal System
I want to continue supporting efforts to ensure Washington’s courts work fairly for all communities. That includes, as discussed briefly above, addressing barriers that disproportionately affect marginalized and working-class communities, strengthening our protections against racial bias and bigotry, and ensuring that every person who comes before the courts is treated with dignity, respect, and fairness.
5. What is the code of conduct for your campaign?
All campaign team members are required to acknowledge and agree to a list of key non-discrimination principles within a detailed code of conduct. The goal of this agreement is to ensure that each member of the team feels valued, safe, and supported within the team structure.
We expect all employees, interns, contractors, vendors, and others to respect the rights and opinions of others, and to refrain from behavior that impairs empowerment in the workplace. We are deeply committed to maintaining a work environment that is free from any kind of harassment, bullying, or discrimination. Conduct that is discriminatory, harassing, or otherwise disempowering will not be tolerated. Such behavior includes, but is not limited to:
Behavior that causes or threatens to harm any person, physically or emotionally, or causes reasonable apprehension of such harm or subjecting another to a substantial risk of such harm;
Physical or verbal threats against, extreme disrespect to, or intimidation of any person which results in limiting her/his full participation;
Activity that constitutes discrimination because of age, race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, national origin, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, or marital or relationship status;
Engaging in disorderly conduct such as fighting; threatening behavior; sexual, gender-based, or other harassment; public disturbance; or drunk and disorderly conduct; and
Other behavior inconsistent with the standard of conduct expected and our commitment to providing an environment conducive to progress, empowerment, and political leadership.
We do not tolerate any form of sexual harassment, or sexual misconduct. Sexual harassment may include sexual advances, sexual solicitation, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct that is of a sexual nature. Sexual misconduct includes behavior that falls short of the legal definition of sexual harassment, but nonetheless is unprofessional, inappropriate, and inconsistent with our cultural values.
We expect all employees, interns, and contractors to treat one another and the public equitably, fairly, and with professionalism and respect at all times. We encourage everyone to report behavior that is unprofessional, inappropriate, unfair, or inequitable. Retaliation for reporting inappropriate behavior will not be tolerated. We are committed to ensuring that nobody experiences an adverse effect or consequence as the result of speaking up.
We are committed to creating a safe and violence-free work environment and will not tolerate violence or threats of violence of any kind.
All team members will be treated fairly and equitably, without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, national origin, age, genetic information, disability, or veteran status.
We believe that all team members have an obligation to create a culture that is supportive and free from intimidation or bias, and we encourage everyone to take action to make our team better. That means we all need to do our part to create an environment that is more empowering, equitable, and enjoyable for all who wish to be a part. This includes reporting misconduct and/or identifying inappropriate behavior as such when we observe it as bystanders.
It is impossible to identify every possible scenario in one document. To that end, we rely on each other’s judgment and willingness to take action in order to ensure that we maintain a campaign culture that is equitable and empowering.
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?
As the son of immigrants and refugees who dedicated thousands of hours to pro bono advocacy before joining the bench, I know firsthand that our legal system only truly works when it is accessible, understandable, and fair to everyone.
I have long worked with immigrant communities and those outside the United States to understand our legal system.
I am continuing that work on the Court and hope to retain my position so that I can continually improve these efforts. I will work tirelessly to demystify court processes by advancing plain-language legal forms, expanding self-help technology, and ensuring procedural instructions do not require a law degree to navigate.
Recognizing that language and cultural barriers frequently isolate vulnerable communities, I advocate for expanded court interpreter services and partner directly with trusted community organizations and affinity bar associations to deliver culturally tailored education.
Furthermore, building on my career-long commitment to supporting civil legal aid and Neighborhood Legal Clinics, I am leveraging my platform to promote robust pro bono service across the legal profession, new pathways for legal professionals who can genuinely improve access, and technological solutions that (with strict oversight) can level the playing field.
Finally, I am continuing strong public outreach efforts, and advocating for accessible court opinions, ensuring our legal system listens to every constituency and guarantees that background or financial standing never stand between a community member and equal protection under the law.
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?
In Washington, General Rule 34 guarantees that those who cannot afford to pay are given genuine access to our courts.
County clerks are taking a very narrow view of that rule, and they are imposing fees on litigants–to fund our court system–that the litigants cannot afford.
We are working closely with the Access to Justice Board and the County Clerks to address this interpretation of GR 34.
More fundamentally, because our court system is not unified, Counties must fund most costs of operating our Superior and District Courts. Many counties deliberately fund the courts significantly through court fees and others prioritize other county needs, which requires the courts to generate their own revenue.
We are working to better unify our courts, and I believe that court costs should be borne primarily by the state. Our Washington Constitution requires that the State and Counties split the cost of Superior Court judges, but otherwise, only state funding can help to correct the reality that our better funded counties can offer superior access to justice than less resourced counties. As I have traveled the state, and spoken to Superior Court judges, it is clear that there is no one-size-fits-all justice system. But it is equally clear that many of our counties are struggling with operating and securing their court systems.
I have been part of the Foundation for Washington State Courts, which makes grants to help counties, primarily with security needs. But this is an urgent priority, and one requiring careful and sustained attention.
3. Would you, if elected, bring restorative justice as a goal to your court room? If yes, describe how that could look.
Restorative justice has an important role in our court systems.
Our therapeutic courts have successfully used restorative justice principles for years. They encourage victim involvement, and restitution, as part of an individualized effort to avoid incarceration when unnecessary. That work must be done by our District Court and Superior Court judges, and is best accomplished the first time an individual becomes part of the criminal justice system. This requires initial screening, special calendars, and support from social workers.
I am a strong proponent of saving the resources needed to incarcerate individuals whenever possible and permitted by the legislature. Reallocating those resources is challenging but is something our Commissions and Committees are working hard to implement. I have been pleased to support their role, and I will continue to do so.
4. What ideas can you offer to make our judicial system more open, transparent, and responsive?
A strong judiciary depends on public trust, and public trust is strengthened when courts are open, transparent, and responsive to the communities they serve. Judges must be personally available and accountable to Washingtonians. I visit schools, attend community events, and put my email address on the Supreme Court’s website. I do as much as I can to make our court available for feedback, and I solicit feedback from voters and stakeholders in our legal system. I have encouraged judges and lawyers statewide to visit schools on Constitution Day, on September 17, and I also will continue to advocate to our judges and lawyers to be an integral part of civics education.
We also can and should improve the clarity of our decisions. We must use clear, plain-language communications, making court procedures easier to understand, and providing timely access to court decisions and records consistent with privacy and legal requirements.
Technology can also play an important role in increasing transparency and accessibility. Remote access to appropriate court proceedings, user-friendly online resources, electronic filing systems, and improved self-help tools can help members of the public better understand and navigate the judicial process. Courts should also continue to invest in language-access services and educational outreach so that people from all backgrounds can meaningfully participate in the justice system.
Finally, we have an important responsibility to continually evaluate our procedures, seeking feedback from court users and stakeholders, and look for opportunities to improve efficiency, accessibility, and fairness while preserving due process and the rule of law.
My goal is to support a judicial system that is transparent in its processes, understandable to the public, responsive to legitimate concerns about access and efficiency, and unwavering in its commitment to fairness and impartiality.
5. What are your thoughts on how our courts could permanently incorporate virtual options for court hearings?
Virtual options have become a vital tool in our modern judiciary, as most courts have already successfully integrated remote capabilities into their daily operations. I believe we should continue to build on this progress, particularly by establishing virtual participation as the norm for jury selection; this removes significant barriers for potential jurors and helps ensure a more representative and diverse jury pool. Moving forward, the incorporation of virtual hearings should be managed with both discretion and encouragement. We must utilize technology to enhance access and efficiency, while always exercising judicial discretion to ensure that in-person proceedings remain the standard when the nature of the hearing, such as sensitive or complex witness testimony, demands the nuance and solemnity of a physical courtroom.
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?
Speeding up our justice system is an important, but perilous, endeavor. We do not want to sacrifice careful attention with any undue haste, but we must also move justice forward as quickly as possible. Below are some of the reforms I support.
There should be a presumptive one-year case schedule from filing to trial. King County recently enacted that schedule, and it has been helpful. That said, most lawyers prefer more time, and extensions and exceptions are the norm. At the judicial conference in October, we will discuss this issue and explore ways to adhere more rigorously.
Resources are a significant problem. We have added judicial officers in Skagit and Yakima county, but we are not tracking all the work we require of our judges. For example, modifying parenting plans and protection orders are not credited, but that is important work for our Superior Courts. We need more judges and judicial officers to speed cases along.
Finally, at the Court of Appeals level, we must limit the extensions that are requested and granted. Advocates have become too comfortable extending appeals for years at a time.
I will continue to advocate for the resources and practices that will hasten final resolution for Washingtonians.
7. What judicial reforms do you support to achieve greater equity and inclusion for BIPOC individuals in our communities?
Greater equity and inclusion requires two separate efforts. The first is systemic, and it involves access to our justice system for those whose rights have been violated. The second is narrower, but equally important, and involves how our courts organize themselves and what judges do to ensure greater involvement of BIPOC communities within the justice system.
I discussed the systemic issues in detail above, but there are important and specific reforms needed to ensure underserved communities are included in our justice system and are treated fairly. Jurisprudentially, we are vigorously enforcing Washington’s General Rule 37, which applies to jury selection. Furthermore, through our key rulings in cases like Henderson and Berhe, we have extended the requirements of GR 37 to address any misconduct at trial that implicates explicit or implicit bias. We also need to pursue outreach to ensure members of the BIPOC community have the support needed to allow them to serve as jurors and witnesses.
Within the legal system, to improve BIPOC equity and inclusion, judges must actively utilize two primary tools: hiring and intentional mentoring, and skill-building. Beyond hiring clerks who challenge my worldview, I am committed to dedicating consistent time—at least 3–5 hours weekly—to mentoring students from diverse backgrounds. I will continue building pathways into the legal profession by engaging directly with law students and early-career attorneys, as I have done in my leadership roles with the Middle Eastern Legal Association of Washington and the King County Bar Association. Furthermore, I will promote initiatives that encourage junior lawyers from underrepresented backgrounds to take leading roles in litigation. By actively supporting Minority Bar Association moot courts and encouraging diverse lawyers to lead arguments in pro bono cases, we provide the vital experience necessary for them to ascend to leadership roles, ultimately ensuring a more diverse, capable, and perspective-rich legal profession.
By typing my name below, I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct.
Printed Name: Theo Angelis
Date: 08/25/2026
