Heather Singleton, et al. v. Mary Fairhurst, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Washington, et al.

Whether the Chief Justice of the Washington Supreme Court in order to ensure “maximum efficiency” of Washington courts pursuant to Wash. Rev. Code 2.56.030(3), and (4), can consistent with the Supremacy Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution, issue an order authorizing a pro tem judge to exercise judicial power to adjudicate a specific case to its conclusion without having to consider litigants’ challenges that the pro tem judge is constitutionally prohibited from doing so under this Court’s Due Process Clause precedents. Whether under the Supremacy Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment a pro tem judge in Washington State who has been authorized by the Chief Justice of the Washington Supreme Court to adjudicate a case to its conclusion, and who has a legal duty under Washington law to comply with this direction pursuant to Wash. Rev. Code 2.56.040 must still consider recusing herself based on her JUDGMENT as set forth on the record where litigants challenge she is biased under this Court’s due process precedents.