C. Plaintiffs fail to allege a constitutional injury, causation, or redressability sufficient for standing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 right to counsel, court had inherent power to award compensation to appointed counsel in “emergency situation” caused by public defender’s resignation). Plaintiffs’ complaint even acknowledges that the power to compel funding is “inherent” to the judiciary and enables “the judiciary . . . to ensure its own survival.” FAC ¶ 5.10 (emphasis added). In sum, Plaintiffs are improperly “asserting another’s legal rights”—the exclusive right of the judicial branch to use its inherent authority to compel constitutional funding in the “rare cases” where this is warranted. Plaintiffs’ complaint must be dismissed for lack of standing for this reason alone.

C. Plaintiffs fail to allege a constitutional injury, causation, or redressability sufficient for standing

Plaintiffs also lack standing because delays in their civil trials do not amount to a constitutional injury, and because the public records in their own underlying cases undermine their theory that delays are caused by inadequate funding or are redressable by their requested relief. To allege injury sufficient for standing to challenge the constitutionality of court funding—assuming Plaintiffs could step into the judiciary’s shoes to do so, which they cannot—Plaintiffs would have to allege that the courts have been so underfunded that they are unable to “fulfill [their] duties.” Juvenile Director, 87 Wn.2d at 252. Notably, Plaintiffs do not allege that a single biennial budgetary request from the Chief Justice has recently gone unsatisfied by the Legislature.15

15 Plaintiffs’ allegation that the judicial branch is “excluded from participation” in the state budgeting process (FAC ¶ 5.9; see also id. ¶ 5.5) is incorrect as a matter of law. The judicial branch provides formal budget requests

MOTION TO DISMISS Case No. 21-2-06462-7 SEA 18

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, Washington 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Instead, Plaintiffs attempt to show underfunding of a constitutional magnitude by citing statements from two decades’ worth of “State of the Judiciary” reports to the Legislature, including that the “trial courts have been severely challenged” or the judiciary has been “stretched thin” at times. FAC ¶¶ 5.27, 5.31. But the most recent report, from 2021—which Plaintiffs incorporate into their complaint, see FAC ¶ 1.11 n.12, ¶ 5.39 & n.39—confirms that the courts have “stayed on course” despite the unprecedented challenges posed by the pandemic.16 Likewise, Plaintiffs fail to allege any facts showing that their purported injuries are “traceable to” the alleged underfunding and “likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” Johnson, 179 Wn.2d at 552 (cleaned up). The records in Plaintiffs’ cases show that the Grant County continuance was based in part on an emergent medical circumstance; the Pierce County continuance was based on a scheduling conflict and postponed the trial for only five months; one King County case was continued due to its remarkable complexity; and the other King County continuance was partially unopposed and postponed the trial for only five months (and Plaintiff amended the complaint just yesterday, August 12). Supra at 7-9. In no case do the allegations or underlying record suggest that the continuances were caused by underfunding by the State. Plaintiffs’ causation theory is contradicted by the judicially noticeable records of their own proceedings, meaning they have not and cannot allege facts that would establish standing.

that must be included in the Governor’s budget proposal without revision. RCW 43.88.090(1). 16 https://www.courts.wa.gov/newsinfo/content/StateoftheJudiciary2021.cfm, at 2, 3 (accessed Aug. 9, 2021).

MOTION TO DISMISS Case No. 21-2-06462-7 SEA 19

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, Washington 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000