The Facts about Judge Williams

The People's Choice

1.   Exceptional Record:  Judge Williams has a record of making fair and legally correct decisions. Of the thousands of decisions Judge Williams has made in criminal and civil cases, only one has been overturned by the court of appeals - for giving too harsh a sentence.  Prosecutors have never appealed a decision of Judge Williams.  Not once. 

2.   Handles a full caseload:  Judge Williams can handle more than a full load of cases. For various reasons, judges are not able to oversee 100% of the cases filed in their judicial district. Judge Williams is one of two judges that serve Union and Wallowa Counties. A full-time caseload would involve handling approximately 50% of the cases filed. Based on the Oregon Judicial Department’s latest statistics, Judge Williams can hear 80% of the cases. This is more than enough cases for a full caseload. See statistics on reverse side. 

3.   Strong community support: Judge Williams is supported by community leaders, small business owners, farmers, ranchers, two retired district attorneys, and other citizens throughout Union and Wallowa Counties. He is supported by the Presiding Judge of Harney and Grant Counties and two retired presiding judges from Umatilla County. Please go to weswilliamsforjudge.org to see the full list of supporters and to read the letters to the editor and testimonials in support of Judge Williams. 

4.   Experience: Judge Williams has extensive knowledge of criminal and civil litigation.  As an attorney for 22 years, Judge Williams was involved in 100s of criminal and civil trials.  As a judge for five years, he has overseen many more.  He knows his way around a courtroom.   

5.   Politics: In 2018, Judge Williams ran against one of the two judges appointed by Governor Kate Brown. Two retired judges and the Union County district attorney endorsed and campaigned heavily for this judge. The voters rejected their candidate and elected Judge Williams. By disqualifying Judge Williams from criminal cases for the past four years, the district attorney ignored the will of the people and chose to have the criminal docket heard entirely by the other judge who was appointed by Governor Brown. This will change after the May election thanks to the bi-partisan efforts of the Oregon legislature to stop district attorneys from doing this. (Senate Bill 807). See the video below - The Facts about the DA.

"% Cases No Flag" (right hand column) shows the percentage of cases Judge Williams can hear.  In 2023, in Union County, Judge Williams could hear 78.6% of the cases.  In Wallowa County, he could hear 81.9% of the cases.

"% Cases No Flag" (right hand column) shows the percentage of cases Judge Williams can hear.  In the first 42 days of 2024, in Union County, Judge Williams could hear 83.1% of the cases.  In Wallowa County, he could hear 88.9% of the cases.

Judge Williams handles a full caseload.  Number of hearings does not equal workload.

Judge Williams' Opinion Piece, submitted to The Observer on April 16, 2024 (not yet published), partly in response to Russ West's "Other views" column of April 6, 2024.

The People's Judge

I believe in a justice system that serves the people; a justice system that honors the American principle of equality before the law; a justice system that protects our constitutional rights. 

I ran for judge in 2018 because I believe in these principles. Before you elected me, the last three judges had been appointed by the governor, the last two by Governor Kate Brown. The recent practice in Union and Wallowa Counties was for judges to retire part way through their term, then have the governor appoint the next judge. But in Oregon, the people have a constitutional right to elect their judges; a judge that lives in, works in, and understands the community he or she serves. When you elected me, we broke the cycle of a small group of insiders choosing your judge through the appointment process. The power to elect the judge was returned to the people, where it belongs.

My record proves that you elected the right judge. Of the thousands of decisions I have made in criminal and civil cases, those that have been appealed have all been upheld but one. Prosecutors have never appealed me. Not once.

I can manage more than a full caseload and I work full time. For a variety of reasons, judges are not able to handle 100% of the cases filed in their jurisdiction. I am one of two judges that serve Union and Wallowa Counties. A full-time caseload would involve handling 50% of all cases filed. The Oregon Judicial Department statistics prove that I can handle approximately 80% of all the cases filed here. That leaves only 20% of the cases for the presiding judge to handle for us to manage the court’s docket.

The 80% of cases I can handle here are non-criminal, civil cases. These cases involve lawsuits, personal injuries, will contests, divorces, property disputes, landlord-tenant, small claims, and many other types of controversies. In many of these cases people do not have lawyers. Here I devote more time and effort. I carefully explain the courtroom procedures and my decisions, and patiently listen as often nervous people tell their stories. 

In his recent opinion piece, Mr. West misrepresented by caseload by refusing to consider many of the above cases that I handle. In his “opinion,” they are only worthy of a “brief hearing” and should not be considered. But, every case is important. I spend the necessary time in court, in chambers, and often after work at home, to make the fair and legally correct decisions. The citizens of Union and Wallowa Counties deserve my full attention.

While I can already handle 80% of the caseload, I look forward to handling the remaining 20% after the election – the criminal cases. It makes sense to wait until after the election – after the people have elected me TWICE – to challenge the DA’s removal. At this point, I trust the DA will mediate to avoid a contested Senate Bill 807 hearing. Experience tells us that contested hearings move parties farther apart and mediation is the better solution. This is particularly true when the parties must work together regularly. Also, our SB 807 hearing may be the first of its kind. I intend to be well prepared and win. I do not currently have the time to devote to this hearing as I am working full-time and running a campaign. 

I made you a promise when you elected me. Throughout all of this, I have kept that promise. I honor the American principle of equality before the law; I protect your constitutional rights; and I make fair and legally correct decisions.  

Wes Williams, Circuit Court Judge. Elected in 2018.

Jennifer Williams' Letter to the Editor, published in The Observer on April 20, 2024 in response to Russ West's "Other views" column of April 6, 2024.

West's column made false claims

Russ West’s “Other views” column of April 6, 2024, failed to provide a fact-based opinion as to why he endorses Jared Boyd for judge. He does not offer a single virtue of Mr. Boyd. Rather, he simply attacked Judge Wes Williams and based his claim that Williams cannot hear a full caseload on Judicial Department statistics he manipulated to fit his agenda. 

Mr. West ignored thousands of cases Judge Williams handles – because, West said, “in my opinion” they require only a “brief hearing.” Judge Williams will address this and other matters in his own response. 

I will address two issues. Mr. West falsely claimed the people who submitted letters to the editor in support of Judge Williams only did so because Williams is “friendly and a good politician.” But these people never characterized Judge Williams as a politician. Rather, they praised Williams for his judicial demeanor, love of the law and strong work ethic. Many wrote their letters because of their positive experiences with Judge Williams in court. In contrast, Mr. West, prior to disparaging Judge Williams, never observed Judge Williams holding court.

Second, I helped get Senate Bill 807 passed with support from Republicans and Democrats, including our representative Bobby Levy and Sen. Bill Hansell. Fifty-five retired judges from around the state and several retired district attorneys testified in support of the bill because of the misuse by some district attorneys of ORS 14.260, the statute allowing lawyers to remove judges. Mr. West gathered a handful of judges, including himself, to try to block the bill. Our local district attorneys opposed the bill. The Oregon Legislature rejected their efforts.

I can only conclude Mr. West’s opposition to this reasonable bill was to prevent Judge Williams from having the ability to challenge the local district attorney’s removal of him from criminal cases. I am confident that should Judge Williams need to challenge the removal after the election - after having been elected twice by the citizens of Union and Wallowa counties - he will prevail.   

Jennifer Williams

Retired attorney and wife of Judge Wes Williams

La Grande