Viewpoint: Statute, precedent matter in Justice of the Peace race

Colin FitzMaurice

Montana permits nonlawyers to serve as justices of the peace. But when people’s rights depend on a judge’s understanding of the law, legal education is not a luxury. It is a qualification voters should take seriously.

Many of the people that appear in Justice Court do so for non-jailable traffic offenses, orders of protection, landlord tenant disputes or small claims issues. These people are not entitled to a lawyer and often don’t have one.

State v. Shamblin started with a person appearing on a speeding ticket. The driver appealed his sentence and the Attorney General’s Office agreed Judge Holloway’s sentence exceeded the bounds of what she was legally allowed to impose. A driver with a speeding ticket should not have to appeal their sentence all the way to the Montana Supreme Court.

People should be able to trust the Judge in front of them knows the law.  I have heard Judge Holloway say she was overturned on a technicality. However, understanding statutes, recognizing the limits of judicial authority, and imposing lawful sentences are fundamental responsibilities of a judge, not technicalities.

Qualifications matter. Judge Holloway has worked in the criminal system, but she isn’t a lawyer, while her opponent, Kelli Sather, is. Kelli Sather is trained to interpret statutes, apply precedent, and understand the boundaries of judicial authority.

For this reason, I support Kelli Sather for Justice of the Peace.