Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.
Stacy Wallace
From Ballotpedia
Tenure
2022 - Present
Term ends
2032
Years in position
3
Stacy Wallace (Republican Party) is a judge of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. She assumed office on January 3, 2022. Her current term ends on January 5, 2032.
Wallace (Republican Party) ran for election for judge of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. She won in the general election on November 2, 2021.
Wallace completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2021. Click here to read the survey answers.
Biography
Stacy Wallace was born in Rochester, Pennsylvania. She earned a bachelor's degree from the University of Pittsburgh in 2001. She earned a J.D. from Duquesne University School of Law in 2004. Wallace's career experience includes working as a lawyer and owner with Stacy Wallace Law LLC, as a staff attorney with legal aid society Northwestern Legal Services, a certified mediator in conflict resolution, and as an adjunct professor. She has served as a law clerk with the Court of Common Pleas of McKean County and the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.[1]
Wallace has been affiliated with the following organizations:
- The Guidance Center: Board of Directors
- Kiwanis Club of Bradford
- McKean County Bar Association: President
- Northwestern Legal Services: Board of Directors
- Pennsylvania Bar Association: Appellate Advocacy Committee, Judicial Administration Committee, House of Delegates Zone 7, Real Property, Probate, & Trust Law Section; Solo & Small Firm Section
- University of Pittsburgh at Bradford: Advisory Board of Directors[1]
Elections
2021
See also: Pennsylvania intermediate appellate court elections, 2021
General election
General election for Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court (2 seats)
Stacy Wallace and Lori A. Dumas defeated incumbent Andrew Crompton and David Spurgeon in the general election for Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court on November 2, 2021.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ |  | Stacy Wallace (R)  | 26.6 | 1,355,445 |
| ✔ |  | Lori A. Dumas (D) | 25.4 | 1,297,253 |
 | Andrew Crompton (R) | 25.0 | 1,274,899 | |
 | David Spurgeon (D) | 23.0 | 1,175,974 | |
| Total votes: 5,103,571 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Democratic primary election
Democratic primary for Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court (2 seats)
Lori A. Dumas and David Spurgeon defeated Amanda Green-Hawkins and Sierra Thomas Street in the Democratic primary for Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court on May 18, 2021.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Lori A. Dumas | 29.7 | 517,311 |
| ✔ | | David Spurgeon | 26.5 | 460,769 |
 | Amanda Green-Hawkins | 25.6 | 445,400 | |
 | Sierra Thomas Street | 18.3 | 318,017 | |
| Other/Write-in votes | 0.0 | 289 | ||
| Total votes: 1,741,786 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Republican primary election
Republican primary for Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court (2 seats)
Stacy Wallace and incumbent Andrew Crompton advanced from the Republican primary for Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court on May 18, 2021.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Stacy Wallace | 50.3 | 704,706 |
| ✔ | | Andrew Crompton | 49.7 | 695,748 |
| Total votes: 1,400,454 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Campaign themes
2021
Ballotpedia survey responses
See also: Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection
Stacy Wallace completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2021. The survey questions appear in bold and are followed by Wallace's responses. Candidates are asked three required questions for this survey, but they may answer additional optional questions as well.
| Collapse all
A proud Pennsylvania native, Stacy currently resides in Bradford with her husband, Curt, and their two children, Lucas and Cora. The daughter of a former Pennsylvania state trooper and a certified medical technician, Stacy initially pursued a career in broadcasting before an advertisement for a local legal aid society inspired her to become an attorney. Stacy graduated from the Duquesne University School of Law in 2004 and passed the bar exam that same year before returning home to McKean County. There, her clerkship experiences motivated her to one day become a judge herself. As an attorney, Stacy has represented a diverse and extensive range of clients across both the public and private sectors. She also has provided pro bono and discounted legal services to local and regional nonprofits, as well as many individual clients. She has represented victims of domestic violence, advocated for those with disabilities, guided families purchasing their first homes, and assisted business owners and corporations. Since 2012, she has been the owner of Stacy Wallace Law, LLC, in Bradford, where she continues to guide her fellow Pennsylvanians through the state’s legal system and is proud to serve as president of the McKean County Bar Association.
- The Right Experience: Stacy will bring substantial, relevant expertise to the bench. Specifically, her work in banking law, election law, and municipal law all involve subjects that come before the Commonwealth Court. She has drafted hundreds of judicial opinions for trial and appellate courts and was unanimously elected president of the McKean County Bar Association.
- A Restraining Approach: Stacy will practice judicial restraint at every turn, while relying on her diverse experience to issue opinions supported by the Constitution that stand up for the rule of law, respect the boundaries of the three branches of government, and restore judicial integrity. She will not rewrite our laws to fit a desired outcome in any case, but will passionately and consistently defend all constitutional rights for all Pennsylvanians.
- A Refreshing Perspective: Stacy hails from a county of 42,000 people, where children get excited to see an occasional airplane and holidays are taken to go hunting. She will refresh the court with a balanced perspective formed by her expansive legal career, experience as a small business owner, and mentorship of other attorneys. She will restore confidence in Pennsylvania’s judicial system, prioritize integrity and due process, and uphold the rule of law with equal justice for all, without exception.
From the very beginning of my legal career, my motivation has always been to seek justice. As both a candidate for Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court and as an attorney with more than 16 years of experience, my highest priority is to seek justice for all regardless of race, gender, religious affiliation, or financial means, especially those who feel left behind, alienated from, or underserved by our state’s legal system. As a judge, I will continue to seek justice, not by legislating from the bench, but by practicing judicial restraint and reaching conclusions in the cases before me solely by applying the law to the facts of the case, and doing so in a way that values equality and due process under the law.
Growing up in McKean County, I learned early on the value of using your talents and abilities to serve others, and serving others with kindness and humility has been my goal throughout my career. My late father Paul’s example of selfless service on behalf of our state and community in the Pennsylvania State Police has been one of my biggest inspirations and will continue to inspire me as Commonwealth Court judge. On the bench, my highest priority will always be serving my fellow Pennsylvanians with respect and humility. Furthermore, I have always prided myself on clarity and conciseness in all of my work as an attorney. On the bench, I will not only seek equal justice for all with every opinion I issue, but I will help my constituents better understand the facts of each case and the application of the law to those facts. While not everyone is going to agree with every conclusion that I reach as a judge, I will communicate my thought process in a manner for all to understand in every case that comes before me.
One core responsibility is that it is imperative for judges to understand the law that they will be applying from the bench. Proper application of the law begins with understanding and applying both the U.S. and Pennsylvania constitutions. Part of understanding both constitutions is recognizing the unique roles of the different branches of government, particularly the role of the judicial branch, which is to apply, rather than write, the law. With this understanding, it is incumbent on judges to understand their role and not waver from that responsibility to reach a desired outcome. Furthermore, judges must recognize that the only time the court should seek to attack or alter a statute is if that statute is unconstitutional. Another core responsibility for judges is to write decisions clearly in a manner for all to understand. Judges are responsible for being cognizant that their target audience in authoring a decision is not limited to the attorneys who handled the case, but rather "We the People." A final core responsibility is to uphold faith in the judiciary. To do so, judges should wear black, not blue, red or green, once they are elected. It is critical that they remain free of political influences and do not even hint to be biased. Judges symbolically wear the robe 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. Accordingly, their personal lives must also be led in a manner worthy of being called "Honorable."
In deciding to run for Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, my most important considerations were first: At which court can I do the most good for my fellow Pennsylvanians and for the commonwealth? And second: Where does my diverse legal background best serve Pennsylvania’s judicial system? While the influence of most state courts is largely limited to the parties in each individual case before them, the Commonwealth Court’s focus on matters involving state government agencies, as well as elections, means that every decision has the potential to impact not only Pennsylvania, but the United States as a whole. Therefore, I believe that as a judge I can do the most good for my state, my fellow Pennsylvanians, and our country by upholding the rule of law and ensuring equal justice for all as a Commonwealth Court judge. Furthermore, given my legal career’s substantive and procedural overlap with the Commonwealth Court’s legal jurisdictions – such as election law, municipal law, and regulatory law including banking and unemployment compensation – as well as my experience drafting opinions at the appellate level, I believe I am well prepared and uniquely qualified to serve on the Commonwealth Court.
My primary concern is that Pennsylvania’s legal system, particularly our court system and judges, are not reflective of the broad spectrum of backgrounds, values, and opinions held by the residents of the commonwealth whose laws they are elected to uphold. Overall, Pennsylvania’s state court judges tend to be residents of our commonwealth’s major cities, and might not necessarily have the depth and breadth of legal experience possessed by attorneys from more rural areas of Pennsylvania. Practicing law in regions such as McKean County, where I am proud to call home, requires attorneys to be extremely versatile and develop legal expertise in a wide range of subject matters as well as a sensitivity and understanding of the values and concerns of the clients they represent. This may not necessarily be the case for attorneys and judges from Pennsylvania’s urban communities, and as a result, many Pennsylvanians may feel left behind by or alienated from our court system.
It depends. The metric used by the Pennsylvania Bar Association in large part relies on factors tailored toward sitting judges, prosecutors or attorneys who practice in areas with large populations. While the experience of sitting judges, prosecutors, and city litigators certainly is relevant, the metric does not consider that other relevant experience exists. If a metric focuses on significantly litigated cases for instance, then the process fails to consider relevant substantive experience that may never be considered "big trials." This can be particularly true in the case of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court, which has subject matter jurisdiction over election law, municipal law and regulatory matters. Much of the day-to-day work in these areas are never "significantly litigated." Local Bar Association ratings — where a bar association knows and interacts with the candidate for a significant period of time — should be given more consideration. The local associations actually have experienced the candidate throughout his or her career and likely may even have a good understanding of the candidate's characteristics in his or her personal life. In Pennsylvania — a state with more than 50,000 attorneys — the state bar association’s judicial recommendations are based solely on the “findings” of an evaluation commission of fewer than 20 people, many of whom are not licensed attorneys. By any reasonable standard, the recommendations of a limited group of people conducting evaluations within a finite period of time and with a finite amount of resources cannot hope to reflect the thoughts, feelings, or recommendations of the majority of members in such a large professional association.
Note: Ballotpedia reserves the right to edit Candidate Connection survey responses. Any edits made by Ballotpedia will be clearly marked with [brackets] for the public. If the candidate disagrees with an edit, he or she may request the full removal of the survey response from Ballotpedia.org. Ballotpedia does not edit or correct typographical errors unless the candidate's campaign requests it.
See also
External links
|
Candidate Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court |
Officeholder Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court |
Personal |
Footnotes
| ||||||||||
