By Carolyn Bick
NORTHWEST ASIAN WEEKLY
Courtesy of Mary Yu
Supreme Court Justice Mary Yu announced earlier this month that she would be stepping down after 11 years serving as one of Washington’s Supreme Court justices. The 68-year-old, mixed-race Chinese American and Mexican American Yu broke several historic barriers, serving not only as the state’s first Asian American Supreme Court justice, but also its first openly lesbian justice. The Northwest Asian Weekly’s Carolyn Bick sat down with Yu to talk about her work, how her background has influenced her path, and some of the most touching moments throughout her career.
Northwest Asian Weekly
Tell me about your childhood. Was there any one person or thing that really influenced your decision to pursue a legal career, particularly in the justice system?
Mary Yu
No. I’m from the inner city of Chicago from a lower working class family, and both of my parents were immigrants. We didn’t know lawyers. The only professional people we knew were teachers at school. So I didn’t have a clue about lawyers growing up. That’s not where the vision came from.
I decided to go to law school after working for 10 years for the [Roman Catholic] Archdiocese of Chicago. I had grown up in a Catholic school and came from a Catholic family. [In college,] I was a religious studies major, because I wanted to teach in a school and teach religion—and I suddenly realized after graduating from college, I didn’t feel ready to teach anybody anything.
I went to the archdiocesan offices and they were opening up an office of peace and justice at that time. I interviewed with the priest and I got the job of the secretary. And this was a young priest, who was just starting and the two of us sat in the office for months trying to figure out what we were supposed to do. We just didn’t know, and then we set out to go and listen. We went to shelters, we went to community groups, doing those things.
This was really in the ‘70s and ‘80s. There was a lot happening on social justice and the church … there was this awakening in Central and Latin America, and the dignity of the human person suddenly had some political ramifications.
When we talk about the right to participation, I’m talking about workers’ rights and housing rights and racism. And so things just flowed. This priest was incredible in teaching me how to write, how to give speeches, how to get up and talk about a vision for social justice. It was almost coincidental and things just happened. And I did that for 10 years and loved it.
It was out of that experience that I said, ‘You know, I could really use a set of tools that will enable me to use the law to do good things.’
I decided to pursue a law degree, at that point.
When you’re doing community organizing work, you’re trying to do social justice work and foster a common good. You can only do it for so long, before you realize that the law really is the mechanism and the tool that changes behavior in society. So that’s really what led me to law school.
Once I graduated, I came to work for the King County Prosecutor’s Office in Seattle. I fell in love with trial practice … and then once I was in the criminal division, I switched to the civil division, which does the defense work and legal advice for all of the county agencies.
One of those happened to be the Superior Court, so I got to know the judges very well. And one day, a judge came to me and said, ‘I’m going to retire. Did you ever think about being a judge? You should apply.’
And my first response was no. I mean, kids like me do not grow up to be judges. I never thought about being a judge. And it was [this judge] and a number of other judges who really said, ‘You know, you really ought to do this. It’s a great job. We love it. You’re great at it.’
So I went ahead and applied.
At that time, Gary Locke was the governor, and I happened to know him from the community. Once we were sitting there in the interview process, he was just really straightforward and said, ‘Look, Mary, I don’t know what you want to do with your life, but I have the power to make this happen if you really want to do this. I just need to know if you want to be a judge.’
And I remember sitting there thinking, ‘I think he wants an answer right now.’
I just said, ‘Governor, you know, if you were to appoint me, I would accept.’ And that’s how it happened. It was amazing.
NWAW
How has your background as a mixed-race Chinese American and Latina American gay woman informed your life, career path, and perspective? Did you ever encounter any friction or bias when you were working for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago?
Yu
We’ll take the second question first and then I’ll come back to the other.
There was friction in the sense of tension. I wasn’t really somebody who was a confrontational activist in that sense. I really believe in the art of persuasion and talking about issues and problems, and I loved what I was doing. I remember knowing that there were some issues that I just wasn’t going to push.
Choice mattered to me at that time. The rights of LGBTQ people mattered to me at that time. It was a different politic, but nevertheless, those values mattered to me.
And yet, I had to ask myself, what was the priority? And issues like racism and poverty and housing—I just decided, ‘You know what? I’m going to do the best I can in these areas,’ recognizing that if I raise the [other] areas, I may find myself without a job or I might find myself in tension with an institution that is sponsoring all this other stuff. So there was tension.
I didn’t feel it from anybody other than myself, but I made a conscious choice to be selective about what I was going to take on.
In terms of the difference my background made, I think my background and the experience of being mixed-race in a time also where there were not a lot of mixed-race people visible—I just felt always on the outs. If it did anything, it taught me how important it is to make people feel included. That’s forever a value for me.
It’s always been there and it still is. I mean, it just still is. I’m always torn.
I’m reminded that most multiracial people feel this, what camp do we really belong to. The push today, recognizing how diverse everybody is, is to say all or none, right? And I don’t think that that’s true.
I think we can be a part of it. There can be harmony. There can be a way to reconcile who we are and be supportive to everyone across the board without having to pick.
As a kid, that’s a little harder. It’s hard to navigate it. And then going through the ‘80s and ‘90s with various identities at this time.
Today, I’m still acutely aware that I’m having to navigate that between various minority communities.
Courtesy of Mary Yu
NWAW
Going from your position in 2000 and then being selected for the Supreme Court—what were those interim years like? And how did those interim years not only prepare you to be a Supreme Court justice, but also prepare you to accept the role?
Yu
When the vacancy opened up on the Supreme Court, I had already been a judge for 14 years, so I knew in my own mind that I was qualified.
The pool of applicants did not have any people of color, and I thought to myself, ‘I keep talking about diverse pools of people. I’ve got to put my name in here only to mix it up.’
At the urging of Justice Gonzalez, at the time, who was already at the Supreme Court, I put my name in. And I never really thought I had a chance. I never really thought that I could be elected statewide as a woman of color, much less, right, an out lesbian woman. Never, never, never, never in my mind would I think so.
NWAW
What’s that process like? Do you get a call at 2 a.m., like the Nobel Prize? How do you find out?
Yu
You apply, and then you get interviewed. You get interviewed by a lot of people—a lot of bar associations, the [Washington] State Bar Association interviews, the governor’s council interviews, and then the governor himself. [Former Gov. Jay] Inslee and I had a couple of conversations, wanting to explore how I understood the law and what it meant to be on the court.
I was really nervous, and I wasn’t really sure that I was in contention. Was I really going to be considered? I didn’t know. Governor Inslee was playing his cards close to the vest. I had no idea whether he was serious. I had no idea whether he would actually take the risk of appointing me.
I just got a call saying the governor would like to appoint me to the court. I thought, ‘Oh boy.’
There’s a level of excitement and level of fear, because I kept thinking, ‘This is a big job and I don’t know if I can do it.’ I never thought of running a statewide campaign when no woman of color had ever been elected in the state. It was a little daunting, as well.
And yet, there were people there from our community who really understand and know what they’re doing when they talk about state politics. Ruth Wu and Gary Locke—all these people, they get it, they know, and they were there to provide guidance.
NWAW
What were the most unexpected moments of your career?
Yu
A high moment for me really was the ability to preside over the first same-sex marriage in the state of Washington, under the law. People had done a lot of unions and civil commitments, but under the law, once it had changed, it was such a privilege to be able to do that.
It came out in an interesting way in terms of the planning. Takao Yamada was my law clerk bailiff at the time, and Takao said to me, ‘You know what, Judge, the law is going to take effect on Dec. 9, and we really should be the first to do it, because couples should not wait one more moment. And the law is in effect at midnight, so let’s do it at midnight.’
And I was like, ‘Takao, are you kidding?’
And he said, ‘No. My father’s Japanese, my mother’s white—they had to move, because at the time, they couldn’t marry each other. The law hadn’t changed yet, and they couldn’t be married. Let’s break through that, and let’s do it first, and let’s make sure people don’t have to wait for a second.’
And I said, ‘Let’s do it!’
We then asked [former King County Executive] Dow Constantine, if we could do that in the courthouse, and he said, ‘Absolutely, we’ll turn the lights on, and we’ll do it at midnight.’
And the court said, ‘We’ll move on to it.’ My staff all volunteered.
That was a high moment, because it was the best of everything. We just said, ‘Anybody who wants to get married, first come, first serve.’
A couple that wanted to was a set of teachers from Mount Vernon. I had done their baby adoption, and they immediately said, ‘We want to get married. Can you do this?’
And I was like, ‘You know what? You guys are first, you’re on.’
And then it just was all night long. We did it until seven in the morning.
NWAW
What was the hardest moment of your career?
Yu
The hardest thing is imposing a sentence that you don’t feel is fair, and yet the law requires that you do that. I had a number of them, but there was one in particular that was really hard.
It was a woman[, Cheryl Lidel,] who robbed a Subway shop—didn’t hurt anybody in terms of shooting or killing or stabbing. She did have a gun, and she robbed the Subway by the convention center. So she comes in front of me, she’s found guilty by the jury, and because it was a third strike offense for her, it meant life in prison without the possibility of release.
It was really hard to impose, because I felt it was unjust, and I had to do it. And so I did.
Years later, I get asked to do a TED Talk at the prison. I go to do the TED Talk, and I’m being very positive and optimistic, like I usually am. My talk is about being released. It’s talking about getting ready, because one day you’re going to be released, and society will be welcoming you back, but what are you doing to make yourself a better person?
After I’m done with this talk, I’m feeling great. This person comes up to me—and it’s the person who I had sentenced. And she said, ‘Judge, do you remember me?’
And I looked at her, and I said, ‘Of course I remember you.’
And she said, ‘You know, you sentenced me to life in prison.’
And I said, ‘Yeah, I know. I had to do what the law asked me to do.’
And she just said, ‘Judge, I just want you to know that I found purpose here. When you sentenced me, I was homeless, I was a drug addict, and I had nothing in my life. When I came to prison, I learned to have a mission and a purpose, and I am telling the young women here what you just said to them is they will leave some day. It doesn’t matter that I’m not. But I tell them the same thing. Thank you for helping me find my purpose in life.’
And I thought, ‘Oh my God, talk about a lovely, gracious, wonderful person.’
As a result of that, I came to visit her personally. I went back to prison to see her, and learned a little bit more about her, and then we corresponded.
Then the legislature came back and changed the law to remove that robbery offense so that it’s not a life sentence anymore for people. The legislature negotiated between the Democrats and the Republicans, and they said, going forward, this is not going to be a strike offense anymore—but they didn’t make it retroactive. [The woman I sentenced] wasn’t going to ever get released, because it wasn’t going to be retroactive, so she missed out on the opportunity.
And then the wonderful media stepped in. The Seattle Times did a huge story about who was it that was left behind? The majority of people left behind were Black people. She was one of the individuals that was featured in terms of one of the Black women who was not going to get released because of the date that they said people would get released.
I happened to be doing a keynote speech for the Seattle Clemency Project Dinner.
And I got up and I told the story about Cheryl Lidel and said, ‘Here is injustice. She’s not going to get relief just because of the date. She really needs a lawyer and somebody needs to bring her case maybe before the clemency board or somewhere, but she needs relief.’
There was a lawyer who came to me. She said, ‘I’ll represent Cheryl. I’ll take up her case.’ This person who took up this case ended up now getting appointed to the federal court.
Because of the Seattle Times piece, the legislature comes back again and they actually fix it and go backwards and make it retroactive. So Cheryl actually gets relief, and she gets the opportunity to be re-sentenced under the law, so she goes back to the Superior Court.
The judge who replaced me [on the Superior Court] was [Samuel] Chung, and I wrote a letter and just said I felt it was an unjust sentence, and I think sentencing her to time served would be fair. And he did.
And she walked out that day.
For me, it was an injustice I was a part of corrected—changed. It was just extraordinary.
NWAW
Are there any other highlights of your career that stick out to you?
Yu
I have enjoyed every single moment, every single case [of my career]. The opinions that I’ve written bring joy. It’s just been a heck of a ride in terms of very positive things happening.
NWAW
Is there anything else you’d like to add or talk about that we haven’t touched on?
Yu
The one thing I want to say is to your readers.
Thank you. My heart is filled with gratitude because the API community was so important and played such a key role in helping me retain the position and supporting me and holding me up each time. As I wind down, I would say my heart is completely filled with gratitude to the API community.
What a wonderful interview. Thank you for sharing.