Although none of the questions asked at Wednesday night’s judicial election forum pertained to family court, much of the debate centered around the division.

The forum, sponsored by the League of Women Voters, featured candidates running for seats in the 14th Judicial District Court and the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal.

David Palay, Mitch Redd and Oliver “Jackson” Schrumpf are running for Division A judge in the 14th Judicial District Court, while incumbent Mike Canaday is running against King Alexander in Division G.

Current Division A Judge Kent Savoie is running against Jamie Yelverton for a 3rd Circuit seat.

Neither Canaday nor Yelverton attended the forum. Both had previous engagements, moderator Helen Curol said.

The current district court judges voted to have Division A serve as family court beginning in January when the new judge takes office.

Palay said that is only temporary because only the Legislature can create a family court jurisdiction.

“There’s been some misinformation in the community about Division A being a family-court-only division,” Palay said. “That is not a permanent situation. The judges cannot vote to change Division A to family court. That is against the Louisiana Constitution.”

Redd said the vote by the judges has been upheld by the state’s high court.

“The judges can vote to designate a particular section to family, juvenile court,” he said. “They’ve done it before. It’s been challenged by Judge (Wilford) Carter. It went to the Louisiana Supreme Court, and it was upheld as constitutional. They can do it, they’ve done it and that’s what it is.”

Schrumpf said that with the area’s expected growth, another division should be added to the court by the Legislature.

The candidates were asked to balance hate crimes and free speech.

“You’re right to free speech ends at my nose. You can wave a flag in my face, but you can’t throw it at me,” Schrumpf said. “In hate crimes, those are things that are designed by legislation. Judges are not legislators. We don’t have the ability to make up the law; we have to swear an oath to follow the constitution and the laws.”

It is not the government’s role to become “thought police,” Alexander said.

“We ought to be able to think what we want and then speak what we want,” he said. “But when you act and impair another person’s right and harm somebody, that’s a crime.”

All said they support specialized courts such as mental health court.

“They provide a tremendous vehicle for, in particular, people with mental health problems and drug addiction problems to have someone with their thumb over them with particular consequences so that they can change their lifestyle,” Savoie said.

There are things in the court he would change, but specialized courts is not one of them, Alexander said.

When asked whether there was a disparity in the number of women and people of color working at the courthouse, all the candidates said they did not find that to be the case.

The candidates were also asked whether they would seek a higher office and finish their term.

Savoie, 66, said that under the state’s current age restrictions, which do not allow judges age 70 and over to seek election, he will not be able to seek a second term and plans to complete the term.

Schrumpf, 64, said he is in a similar situation.

Alexander, 59, said he is not “looking to start a political career” and plans to serve one or two terms as a district court judge.

Redd, 49, said he has no plans to seek higher office.(MGNonline)