Nick Brown, left, a Democrat, speaks during a debate in Spokane, on Sept. 18, 2024. He and Pete Serrano, a Republican, right, are running for Washington state attorney general in 2024. (Bill Lucia/Washington State Standard)
Democrat Nick Brown and Republican Pete Serrano sharply differ over the role and scope of Washington’s attorney general.
Their conflicting views — Brown sees the office as a vehicle for change, Serrano sees it as too activist — were on display this week in two debates between the two candidates competing to become Washington’s top lawyer.
Their first confrontation was Wednesday in Spokane, an event hosted by the Washington Business AssociationThe next day they traveled over the Cascades to Seattle for a debate hosted by the Washington Debate CoalitionThe Washington State Standard co-sponsored Thursday’s debate, and reporter Laurel Demkovich was on the panel of journalists asking questions.
The winner of the Nov. 5 general election will be charged with advising the governor, the Legislature and state agencies on legal issues and representing them if they ever end up in court. The attorney general’s office is consisting of 27 legal departments including consumer protection, civil rights and criminal law.
Whoever is elected will oversee more than 1,800 employees, including about 800 attorneys who provide legal services to more than 230 state agencies, boards and commissions.
Below are highlights of what they said during the debates.
Very different views on work
Serrano believes the office should not play too large a role in proposing legislation.
“The attorney general’s office needs to get back to what its constitutional mission is,” Serrano said Wednesday. “Go back to advising those regulatory agencies. Don’t let them run amok. Don’t let them expand their own powers.”
He said he would not introduce legislation unless it was necessary for the performance of his duties.
Brown, on the other hand, has a broader view of the office. While he agrees that a large part of the job is advising state government, he said Wednesday that the primary role is to be an advocate for the people of Washington.
“It will be my duty to ensure that my office is always aware of how we are improving people’s lives and how we are advocating for them,” Brown said.
Not proposing legislation would be a “fundamental missed opportunity,” he said, citing issues such as the housing shortage and the rise in fentanyl deaths and gun violence as issues the attorney general can step in to help residents.
“You don’t take on Bob Ferguson”
During Wednesday’s debate, Serrano repeatedly criticized the leadership of current Attorney General Bob Ferguson, saying Ferguson pushed too hard for legislation and calling his excessive litigation through the consumer protection agency an abuse of power.
Brown chided his opponent. “You’re not running against Bob Ferguson. You’re running against me, and we need to focus on the differences between you and me.”
In response, Serrano said he cited Ferguson because of how much Brown has praised his work. And Serrano said he wanted to emphasize how different his approach to the job would be than Ferguson’s.
“The only reason I bring up Bob Ferguson is because Nick says he has a great legacy to uphold,” Serrano said. “I obviously disagree with that statement.”
Divide over weapons
Gun laws are a major issue where the two candidates disagree.
Serrano is the director and general counsel of the Silent Majority Foundation, a group that has repeatedly challenged Washington’s gun restrictions. He represents a gun store owner fight against the state ban on ammunition magazines containing more than 10 rounds. He said Thursday that people want to buy guns to protect themselves.
“We can’t ban protection in Washington. It doesn’t work,” he said. “I’ve consistently advocated for individual rights, for the ability for the individual to protect themselves, whether it’s individuals who are suffering from domestic violence, or people who are just walking down the street. You can’t walk down the street and always feel safe.”
Brown was concerned about gun violence and suicides.
“This is an area where Pete and I couldn’t disagree more. He’s spent a good portion of his career undermining gun safety laws here in Washington state, passed by the people, passed by the legislature. He’s advocating for more guns, more dangerous guns. He’s advocating for more ammunition in our community,” Brown said. “I don’t believe that’s the answer.”
Brown said he is open to working with the Legislature on new gun safety laws. Serrano said he wants to make sure the Legislature “understands what its limitations are” on this policy area.
Tense debate over arrests in January 6 attack
Wednesday’s debate format allowed candidates to grill each other with a single question. Brown took the opportunity to ask Serrano about an earlier comment in which he described rioters arrested at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, as “political prisoners.”
Serrano said it was clear that the arrest of those accused of rebellion was a “political process” in which these people were being held “on political charges” without access to a lawyer.
“That is a fundamental right that the government should protect,” Serrano said. “The government has completely failed those individuals.”
In his response, Brown said he fails to understand how the actions of those accused of assaulting a police officer or disrupting democracy can be considered “political.”
Abortion is another dividing line
Washington is known for its strong legal protections for people seeking abortions and for people providing reproductive services.
Serrano, a social conservative, said he would not try to undo or overturn existing laws because voters put them in place on their own initiative.
“This has been a standing issue since 1970. So there’s no reason for me to go and undo what’s been done,” he said Thursday. Unless the Legislature or voters make a change in the future, “my job is to protect what’s been protected,” he added.
When asked if he would sue the federal government to maintain access to mifepristone — which Ferguson has done — Serrano said he would. Mifepristone is one of two pharmaceutical drugs used in medical abortion.
That surprised Brown.
“That’s the first time he’s said that. I applaud you for taking that position,” said Brown, who later in the debate said his opponent would not defend what was in the books.
Last year the legislature passed a “shield law” which protects patients from criminal investigations in their home states if they travel to Washington for abortion care. Violators of Washington’s law can be prosecuted by the state’s attorney general.
Brown vowed to uphold it. “We need to protect people in our state, whether they are lifelong residents, tourists or come here for the health care they deserve. Just because the state of Idaho has changed their abortion laws, I will not stop protecting women who come here for the health care they need and deserve.”
Serrano says he struggles with the idea of taking measures that would prevent other states from enforcing their laws.
“We have 50 states that have the power to make laws the way they want to make them. The idea that we would want to overturn another state’s law puts us in a difficult position. Why wouldn’t those states want to overturn our laws? I can’t tolerate that.”
The Standard’s editor, Bill Lucia, contributed to this report.
