Michelle MacDonald
Non-Partisan | Minnesota
Candidate Profile*
Insufficient Information
*Additional information appears below for educational purposes; however, only data received prior to the candidate deadline was considered during Panel Evaluation.
BIOGRAPHY
Name
Michelle MacDonald
Party
Non-Partisan
Election Year
2020
Election
General
Race
Supreme Court (Thissen seat)
Incumbent
No
Links
EDUCATION
Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, BA, 1983
Suffolk University Law, Boston, MA, J.D, 1986
Harvard University, Boston, PIL, 1994
WORK & MILITARY
MacDonald Law Firm,LLC, Attorney & Mediator, 1987 - Present
Family Innocence Nonprofit, Founder, Restorative Justice Circle Facilitator, 2011 - present
Hennepin County Court, Judge, Conciliation Court, 1999 - 2014
Hennepin County Court, Adjunct Referee/Arbitrator, 1992-2011
AFFILIATIONS
Family Innocence, keeping families out of court, Founder, Restorative Circle Facilitator &Trainer, Minnesota State Bar Association
Family, Children's Law & ADR sections, Cooperative Private Divorce Project, Founding Member
Custody/Parenting Time Dialogue Group, Founding Member, National Assn for Community & Restorative Justice
Active Member/Restorative Circle Facilitator, Restorative Practices International, Member, Contributor
Christian Legal Society, Member, Contributor, NorthStar Law & Policy
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
(Candidate did not provide)
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Minnesota Supreme Court, 2014
Race
OTHER INFORMATION
QUESTIONNAIRE*
*Additional information was received after the evaluation was assigned and was not considered in the Panel Evaluations, therefore it is for additional educational purposes only.
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Religious liberty is at risk in the United States and deserves the highest level of protection in the law.
Agree
The Ten Commandments should not be displayed in public school buildings or court houses.
Neutral
What does "separation of church and state" mean to you?
Our founders did not want the church to rule over our government, or vice versa. The declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776 states: " We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. " Our constitution was not designed to give us rights, but to preserve and protect our inalienable rights, rights that are fundamental by virtue of being born on this earth.
VALUES
Judeo-Christian values established a framework of morality which is necessary for our system of limited government.
Agree
George Washington's comment that “Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society” is still true today.
Agree
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
Three words: Family, Family and Freedom. I was baptized and raised Catholic, and went to Catholic schools through college. I attend church regularly with family and friends, all denominations. Since 1999, I am member of Woodcrest Church, a bible-based Christian church. As an adult, I was baptized both in water and in the holy spirit. I have accepted Jesus Christ into my life as our Lord and Savior.
In light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision Bostock v. Clayton County, which justice’s opinion most closely aligns with your opinion of whether the protections of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should be extended to the LGBTQ community?
It can include everyone
What types of pro bono work have you done?
I continuously do pro bono work in family, criminal, juvenile and appellate court matters, including Amici Curiae (“Friend of Court”) Briefs for the Supreme Court relating to constitutional challenges. I founded Family Innocence, a nonprofit dedicated to keeping families out of the court adversarial process, where I am volunteer president, mediator, and restorative justice circle facilitator & trainer. I have been recognized by the MSBA North Star Pro Bono Lawyer Program (2013-2018)
ABOUT YOU
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
2012 Republican Primary, 2012 General Election, 2014 Republican Primary, 2014 General Election, 2016 Republican Primary, 2016 General Election, 2018 Republican Primary, 2018 General Election
When you consider your views on a wide range of issues from economic and social matters to foreign policy and immigration, which of the following best describes you overall?
Somewhat Conservative
Please provide publicly available information validating your answer to the previous question.
Below are parts of my endorsement speech at the Republican Convention: "Court orders by judges are daily affecting the lives and constitutional and civil rights of millions of Americans. It is a matter of profound importance to all people, parents, children, families and you, that I --- as an individual, an attorney and judge --- uphold your fundamental Liberty rights. The entire social and political structure of Minnesota and America rests upon the cornerstone that we the people have certain rights which are inherent. That means that we do not have to go to lawmakers or courts to obtain those rights, but we turn to lawmakers and courts to protect and reinforce our Rights. These are the rights to protect ourselves, our Liberty, our Life, our Liberty with our resources, our property, our family and our pursuit of happiness." "I will as your Supreme Court Justice protect and defend your right to establish a home, family relations, to acquire possess and enjoy your property."
What education or experience qualifies you to hold the office for which you seek election?
For 33 years, I have represented thousands of people with legal challenges before hundreds of judges at every level ---district court, appellate court, Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. For 22 of those years, I served as conciliation/small claims court Judge; and Adjunct Referee in family court. I founded Family Innocence, a non-profit dedicated to keeping families out of court, where I am a mediator and restorative justice circle facilitator and educator. I advocate a unitive system--- a model of justice that is equal and voluntary, where those in conflict meet in a safe space, hear each other out, and decide what to do about their conflict. All individuals and members of the community are empowered to address conflict using various communication tools. This includes the responsibility for bringing concerned parties together to participate, with the goal to not only resolve conflicts and heal harms, but to contribute to the public safety and achieve social benef
In what areas of law have you practiced?
My general practice areas include Civil Rights, Constitutional Issues, Family Law, Child Custody, Support, Property, Child Protection, Adoption, Juvenile, Wills, Trusts & Probate, Traffic & Criminal, Business, Real Estate, Injury, Appeals and more.
Have you ever been convicted of a felony or been penalized for sexual misconduct? If so, please explain.
No.
Why should the voters choose you?
I am the best candidate for the Supreme Court because I am not afraid to speak out about the corruption in our court system, and the need to end legal tyranny and restore justice for all. My experiences have led me to believe that eradicating judicial corruption should be the highest priority for an elected official. If elected to the Minnesota Supreme Court, I pledge to eradicate judicial corruption, ensure judicial integrity and restore justice for all.
Is there anything else you would like voters to know about you?
The role of a Supreme Court justice, as the final arbiter of the Constitution, is to judge the law, and the lower court’s adherence to the law in their rulings and decisions. Acting on beliefs and feelings is part of the corruption in our system of justice. I advocate a unitive system--- a model of justice that is equal and voluntary, where those in conflict meet in a safe space, hear each other out, and decide what to do about their conflict. What I have seen in court leads me to believe that the Supreme Court has an obligation to involve itself in community and restorative justice circles and other practices. Many members of the public do not realize that the Supreme Court does a lot more than issue rulings. They make the rules and allocate the budget which determines how our courts operate. As an associate justice, I will do my part to ensure judicial integrity, and hold our lower court judges accountable to the Rule of Law, the Constitution and the people in all cases.
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
The U.S. Constitution and my state constitution should be interpreted as living documents, rather than using a strict constructionist or originalist approach in judicial decisions.
Disagree
There are times when American judges should alter U.S. case law in order to comply with foreign case law.
Neutral
Which current U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Not sure.
What is the proper use of legislative history in interpreting statutory law?
I am not sure what you mean by this question. Clear rules are a requirement of due process, that often is not adhered to. There are over 64 million rules, regulations and laws across the country. Many of our laws are unnecessarily complicated. Laws should be guidelines, as clear as a stop light - green means go, red means stop, and yellow means slow down, without implementing strict liability of course. The need to interpret complex laws may indicate a lack of clarity. Due process of law requires clear rules, government adherence to those rules, speedy trials, adequate legal representation for all parties, impartial decision makers, and an appellate process. See eg. MLB v. SLJ, 519 US 102 (1996); Stanley v. Illinois, 405 US 645 (1972); Armstrong v. Manzo, 380 US 545 (1965); Mullanne v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co. 339 US 306 (1950) Law makers, law enforcement and courts regularly disregard these elements. A judge that must apply the law if constitutional.
What possibilities should a judge exhaust before departing from precedent?
I am not understanding your question. A judge is an impartial decision-maker. A judge must follow the law. A judge is to determine relevant particularized facts, apply those facts to relevant law, reach a legal conclusion, and make an order. The Judge must follow the law, unless the law is unconstitutional, and judges at any level have the ability to determine the statutes' constitutionality. An important aspect of the separation of powers--- separation of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government --- is to provide checks and balances, where legislation can be challenged by judges as to its constitutionality as written and/or applied.
How should a judge determine which rights are protected by the Constitution even though they are not specifically mentioned?
The initial consideration is to determine which rights are fundamental and inalienable for life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. These are human rights.
