Support the experience and integrity of Natalie Hudson for Supreme Court

Judicial primaries and elections are as important as presidential or gubernatorial elections to me, maybe more important.

There is a primary next Tuesday that all Minnesotans have a stake in, even if there is nothing happening specifically in the ballot in your local election world.

When Justice Alan Page was forced to retire last year from the Minnesota Supreme Court at age 70, the state’s mandatory retirement age, he was replaced by Natalie Hudson, a 13-year court of appeals judge and a former MN Assistant Attorney General.  This is not a qualification to serve on the court, however her qualifications are stellar, but she is the only minority on the Court, and I believe it is important that the court be as diverse as our community.

She is being challenged by two people, one who’s major qualification for being a supreme court judge, according to his own answer to a MN Bar questionnaire is “I want to be elected as a Judge because I am unemployed and I want to work.”  The second challenger is Michelle MacDonald.  That name may sound familiar.  A video of her surfaced a couple years ago when she ran for MN Supreme Court speaking at a Republican Convention and saying basically that the Bible is more important in her decision making than the constitution.

I for one agree with her that the Bible is more important than the constitution, but, not for a Supreme Court Justice and not for a government.  Their job is to make decisions based on the constitution and law, not the Bible.

Here is a link to the MNBar Questionnaires for each judicial candidate.  I think when you read these, the answer to number 5 about breaking the law, would make me choose the unemployed lawyer over Michelle MacDonald.  Natalie Hudson is by far the most qualified.  In an MNBar poll, she received 90% of the votes from her colleagues.

I hope you will vote in the Primary next Tuesday and I hope you will vote for Natalie Hudson on the Supreme Court.

Advertisements

One thought on “Support the experience and integrity of Natalie Hudson for Supreme Court”

  1. Glad you took the time to review the candidates as too many people don’t … yet past results means that incumbent justices who are challenged seem to face some “too close” elections. Case in point, in the 2014, election Michelle MacDonald received 46.5% of the vote … and in another contest, another perennial, John Hancock, received 43%.

    That tells me that the system needs to be changed … justices should get a fixed term that they can apply to be renewed … which would be approved by an independent review board … something along the lines proposed by the Quie Commission.

    BTW … didn’t MacDonald not get endorsed by the MN-GOP this time ?

    Also, the other candidates name is Craig Foss.

Comments are closed.