Nathan Rouse is Running for Seattle City Attorney

Nathan Rouse is running for Seattle City Attorney. 

Nathan has pursued public service for the majority of his career, spending the last four years toiling away in public defense in a thankless system set up to make his work difficult. Beside his obvious competence as an attorney, his perspective as a public defender is his biggest strength–and certainly his biggest differentiator - in the race for Seattle City Attorney. 

Rouse graduated from Seattle University with highest honors and worked for a few years at a couple of fancy law firms, before landing two extremely elite judicial clerkships - one in federal district court, and one on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. After a few more years in a law firm, his pro bono work started to swallow much of his time and all of his professional passion. 

He worked on a case that had been turned down by the Innocence Project, as the case didn’t involve a factual claim of innocence. But it did involve an unjust use of life imprisonment, or at least a sentence that was certain to take more than the length of a person’s life.

His client, who had survived a traumatic and violent childhood, was 18 when he was sentenced to 75 years in prison for his minimal role in a highly publicized shooting. The shooters themselves had taken plea deals and been sentenced to 35 years. But his client had decided to not take a deal and go to trial; when he lost, the judge imposed a sentence that was harsher than the one recommended by the prosecution. Rouse saw the injustice in this outcome and dove into the assignment. After spending hundreds of hours on the case, visiting his client in prison, and appealing to the Washington Supreme Court, Rouse got his client’s sentence reduced to 21 years, getting him 54 years of freedom. He couldn’t stop after that.

Nathan seems humble, and I never got a sense of him patting himself on the back. But having spent my time around a lot of elite lawyers and knowing he had clerked at the federal level, I decided to do some digging. He left a firm where I suspect he would have since partnered. The profits per equity partner at Davis Wright and Tremaine are currently $1,270,000, which gives some indication of where Rouse was eventually headed. The most recent public data I can find from 2023, suggests Rouse currently earns less than 1/10th that amount, just below the Seattle family median income–while defending people that most of us won’t deign to make eye contact with on the street. “The Lord’s work,” as the saying goes.

While he may not think the opportunities he gave up were worth mentioning– and perhaps it would be obnoxious for him to bring this up–I have watched countless well-meaning attorneys with big plans for public service fall prey to the siren song of money and prestige. I think his sacrifices are notable. 

Both Nathalie Graham at the Stranger and Erica Barnett at Publicola have provided strong writeups of Rouse’s aims and criticisms of the current system and incumbent. Barnett’s includes lengthier and fuller answers in Rouse’s own words, whereas Graham’s intersperses the quotes with policy summaries. 

Rouse also did a wonderful job calling out Ann Davison’s Republican approach to policy and her empty grandstanding–showing he would do a good job prosecuting the case against her. 

Most of Rouse’s policy problems with Ann Davison are similar to his opponent Rory O’Sullivan, whose candidacy I wrote up in January. Both are strong candidates for replacing the incumbent Ann Davison, whose lack of experience, lack of skill, and Republican bona fides have consistently marred her work. Both have stood up for those who need it - O’Sullivan for renters, voters, and the unemployed, Rouse for the criminally accused. Both have impressive resumes.

Where I would say Rouse and O’Sullivan diverge is their experiences, and the ways in which they will inform their work. 

Rouse has been delightfully specific about policy in his public opinion pieces. He advocates for ending cash bail for nonviolent misdemeanors—rejecting the notion that we should jail someone simply because they’re too poor to pay, a policy that disproportionately harms BIPOC and low-income residents. He thinks we should ban discrimination against unhoused job applicant, showcasing ways the City Attorney’s office can be proactive, rather than just reactive to cases brought to it. He recognizes the need for policing, but is also clear on the rot within Seattle’s system - pointing out that the Seattle Police Officers Guild is the problem and providing concrete steps the City Attorney can take to address the problem. 

O’Sullivan has fought on behalf of renters and the unemployed, which is larger part of the population than those in the misdemeanor system. Rouse has fought for the criminally accused. O’Sullivan has been more entrepreneurial in his path and is more connected politically, having been a leader in fighting for greater democratic participation in Washington State. Rouse’s professional path is closer to conventional, but a more obvious fit for the mix of criminal and big civil cases the City Attorney’s office handles. Rouse understands the criminal legal system deeply, having seen firsthand and in great detail the ways this system far too often fails the accused, and those proclaimed innocent and guilty. He seems to have a keen eye for how we could do better for our community and to individuals and their families when it comes to how we treat the criminally accused. 

I like both of them–a lot. Both would make excellent replacements for the current City Attorney. That office is involved in prosecuting misdemeanors, defending the city against lawsuits, and suing on behalf of the city. I can think of excellent reasons to vote for either - a too-rare embarrassment of riches! 

I encourage you to take thirty seconds to donate your Democracy Vouchers to Rouse, which is something every voting age Resident of Seattle can do, or donate to his campaign here. 

You would do just as well to sign over your vouchers to O’Sullivan or donate to him (I hadn’t provided these links in the past, as it was too early in the race - and am trying to be fair!).

Please share this with folks, as most people do not follow this race closely enough. It is highly consequential.