Money, acrimony, and outside political spending have flooded into the heated races for the Washington Supreme Court, culminating in a sharp dispute over digital attack ads purchased by a labor-funded political action committee on Google and Meta despite platform prohibitions, kuow.org reported.
The campaign for King County Superior Court Judge Sean O’Donnell flagged tens of thousands of dollars in digital attack ads placed by “Beware the Attack on Our Courts,” an independent political action committee funded by labor unions and trial attorneys. Because Google and Meta do not comply with Washington state disclosure laws related to digital advertising, both tech giants officially prohibit ads for state and local candidates in the state. Despite these bans, however, ads frequently run for hours before platforms flag and remove them.
Disputed Digital Ad Buys on Google and Meta
Stephen Paolini, a political consultant for O’Donnell’s campaign, called the strategy unethical even if technically legal. “These ads on these platforms do not comply with Washington state law and everyone involved in politics knows that’s the case,” Paolini said, noting that both platforms maintain clear policies against accepting such advertisements.
Washington State Where Law Breaking Is the NormSEIU 775 Union Home Health Care, the Purple People Eaters In heated Washington judicial race, labor PAC buys ads on Google, Meta despite prohibitionsOct. 28, 2026Money and acrimony are flooding into the heated races for… pic.twitter.com/ey4HJnoJZV
According to Paolini, the Google ads effectively bought search terms to steer users searching for information on O’Donnell directly to the independent expenditure’s website. Google removed the group’s ads on Monday, while Meta kept them running until Wednesday before rejecting them under its regional election policies, a spokesperson confirmed.
The targeted digital campaign features mixed messaging. Some ads support King County Appeals Court Judge Ian Birk, O’Donnell’s opponent for the open seat on the state Supreme Court. Others deploy sharper rhetoric, claiming that “Radical right-wing orgs and MAGA Republicans want to roll back our rights.”
Jack Sorensen, a spokesperson for Beware the Attack on Our Courts, defended the spending and confirmed that the group reported $58,000 in Google ad expenditures to the state’s Public Disclosure Commission (PDC). “I would suspect that a candidate for supreme court knows that,” Sorensen said regarding the legality of the ads.
Washington Supreme Court Upholds Record Meta Campaign Finance Fine
The controversy over digital ads unfolds against a backdrop of wider campaign finance friction in Washington. In June, the Washington Supreme Court upheld a $35 million penalty against Meta—the largest campaign finance fine in state history, as noted by the Washington State Standard—following a lawsuit tied to the company’s failure to maintain required digital ad records under the state’s Fair Campaign Practices Act.
The public unions appear to be straight up flaunting WA election rules.Google and Meta both ban Washington election ads. (Thank you Bob Ferguson) Their PAC, Beware the Attack on Our Courts, bought $58,000 worth on Google anyway. Google yanked them Monday. Meta rejected them… pic.twitter.com/gfS9YIXmtc
Seattle attorney Tallman Trask, who filed an initial complaint with the PDC a decade ago that helped spark the Attorney General’s Office lawsuit, described the current environment as “the worst of both worlds.” Trask noted that while candidates are strictly constrained from online advertising, outside groups exploit loopholes, creating a scenario where a PAC can bypass restrictions that bind candidates.
Beyond the digital ad dispute, tensions remain high between opposing camps. Sorensen accused the business PAC “Citizens for Working Courts” of delayed reporting regarding contributions from a related political committee to the PDC, alleging an attempt to obscure funding sources. That business PAC received hundreds of thousands of dollars from JOBS PAC—including funds from oil, pharmaceutical, and insurance companies—and reported spending more than $290,000 to support O’Donnell. Meanwhile, the group “Concerned Taxpayers of Washington State,” backed by conservative donor Steve Gordon, reported spending nearly $94,000 to support O’Donnell.
Sorensen also pointed to O’Donnell’s disavowal of outside conservative support. “I’ve heard Sean O’Donnell’s campaign say over and over, ‘Well, you know, we don’t know these people. We didn’t ask for their support,'” Sorensen said. “But they seem to know him and know him well enough to pick him as their guy for Supreme Court.”
Adding to the friction, Paolini criticized Beware the Attack on Our Courts for benefiting from an October 22 rule change by the state’s Public Disclosure Commission that suspended contribution limits for political committees. “Their PAC just reported $250,000 in new money that would have been illegal had the PDC not changed the rules in the final hour,” Paolini said of a contribution from the union SEIU 775.
