If Judge Swanberg focused on the Tri-Citians he serves instead of himself, he would resign

In his refusal to resign his elected position, Tri-City Judge Sam Swanberg is putting himself ahead of the people he serves.

That, in itself, is unfortunate.

Two separate cases have brought the Benton-Franklin Superior Court judge to this disappointing point in his career. Swanberg has been accused of harassment by a recent girlfriend and he has been accused of domestic violence by his ex-wife.

On the harassment issue, a one-year, no-contact order requested by his former girlfriend has been put in place. His attorney, Scott Johnson, said Swanberg agreed to it because he knows he could have handled their breakup better.

A sitting judge with a no-contact order is troubling enough — and that was why a week ago the Herald’s Editorial Board called for him to step down.

But Johnson responded on behalf of his client with a news release stating Swanberg intends to remain a judge.

Johnson justified his decision based on the fact that the domestic abuse claim against Swanberg is unsubstantiated, and he wrote, “For anyone to suggest that Judge Swanberg should resign based on unsubstantiated and uninvestigated allegations is contrary to the very foundation of American justice. Judge Swanberg’s resignation would be an admission by him that he did those things he is accused of. Because he did not do any of those things, he will not resign, and he will continue to serve the people of Benton and Franklin counties.”

Not once in the release did Johnson mention the no-contact order against Swanberg.

Johnson focused solely on the domestic violence issue because, at the time, it was the best argument he could make to support Swanberg’s refusal to step down.

The problem is the release misrepresented the Herald’s position.

The original editorial that called for Swanberg’s resignation did not get into the details of the domestic violence issue. In fact, the editorial acknowledged that Swanberg has firmly denied the allegations made against him, and that the details of his divorce were still in the “she-said, he-said” stage.

But despite that, judges are supposed to avoid even the appearance of impropriety in order to keep the public’s confidence.

Again, his behavior toward his former girlfriend, Sila Salas, is enough to make citizens question Swanberg’s judgment. Her job is in the Benton County Justice Center where Swanberg also works, and now he is not allowed to be within 25 feet of her workplace.

Swanberg’s credibility is damaged, and the Herald’s concern is that it isn’t fair to expect citizens to go before a judge who is under such a heavy cloud of doubt.

And the six other Benton-Franklin Superior Court judges and three court commissioners apparently agree with that stance.

They recently voted unanimously to restrict Swanberg’s assignments in both counties until further notice. A news release said that the court has a duty to the public to ensure that all judges are fit to serve, and “where the conduct of a judge, actual or alleged, raises a real and substantial question regarding the trust and confidence of the public, this bench has an obligation to act.”

So does this mean taxpayers must pay the salary of an elected official who is not allowed to do his job for an indefinite period of time?

If so, this is unacceptable. In Washington state, the Supreme Court and Superior Court judges are exempt from the state’s recall process, and Swanberg is not up for election again until 2024.

On Tuesday, Swanberg was cited by the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office with two counts of fourth-degree assault domestic violence. He’s scheduled to enter a plea to the charges Feb. 8, and a temporary protection order for Swanberg’s ex-wife is in place until then.

On the harassment issue, the Benton County Sheriff’s Office has completed its investigation and it is being forwarded to a prosecuting attorney in another county for review.

The layers of allegations have piled on, and we don’t see how Swanberg can be effective any longer in his judicial position.

It is understandable that he wants to fight for his reputation, but in the meantime Swanberg should consider how his actions and decisions are affecting his colleagues and the public.

If he does, he should see that stepping aside is the right thing to do.

This story was originally published January 19, 2022 at 12:29 PM.