Meet the Candidate

Running For:
Political Affiliation:


Response Legend

  • AAgree
  • DDisagree
  • Declined to Respond/Undecided, Position Unknown/Unclear
  • *Comment
  • Declined to respond, Position based on citation

Question Response Comments/Notes
1. Which of the following U.S. presidents best represents your political philosophy? Ronald Reagan
2. Which one of the recent justices of the U.S. Supreme Court most reflects your judicial philosophy? Thomas / Scalia
3. Rate your judicial philosophy on a scale of 1-10 with "living document" approach being a "1" and "strict construction" or "originalist" being a "10." 10
4. Please list the five organizations in which you are most involved as a member, through contributions, and/or through volunteering. ** HOPE Foundation youth at risk, Hope with Horses, Allegheny County Bar, Pittsburgh Leadership Foundation, PBA
5. Do you agree with the US Supreme Court’s statement in Dobbs v. Jackson, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), that "[l]ike the infamous decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, Roe [v. Wade] was also egregiously wrong and on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided"? -* Plessy was an egregious decision in 1954 holding that racial segregation laws did not violate the US Constitution, created the separate but equal doctrine and was not overturned until 68 years later in Brown. Dobbs overruled Roe, decided 50 years prior, and Casey, holding that the US Constitution does not confer a right to abortion and returned regulation to the states. As a statewide appellate court judge in the Commonwealth Court of PA, I hear cases which challenge the constitutionality of PA laws and regulations and I am not permitted to opine on matters which may come before me. While the US Constitutional issue has been decided, the issue of PA Constitution laws or regulations has and the impact, if any, of Dobbs upon them.
6. Do you agree with the US Supreme Court’s statement in Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65-66 (2000), and Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166 (1944), that "the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder"? A* Cases have held this in PA and I agree to this fact. But the courts do apply this to "fit" parents. As to its application in any particular matter, I will hold to constitution and apply the rule of law. Any particular interpretation is reserved for that. I am a state appellate court judge and this question comes into our court, I am not permitted to opine. I do note, however, in Troxel the US Supreme Court in a plurality opinion held this is a fundamental right to control upbringing of children. And a law that allows anyone to petition for visitation rights over parental objections unconstitutionally infringes on that right. In a concurring opinion Justice Thomas would apply strict scrutiny and said the state has no legitimate governmental interest in second guessing a fit parents decision regarding visitation with third parties. I will abide by my oath to uphold the Constitution and be fair and impartial and uphold the rule of law.