In this episode of Off The Record with Gerstner Adam Law, we sit down with Judge Amy Eddy, a Montana Eleventh Judicial District Court Judge and candidate for the Montana Supreme Court.

Judge Eddy shares her journey from growing up in rural Idaho to handling over 10,000 cases on the bench, and gives a behind-the-scenes look at how the court system really works.

We cover:
• What district court judges actually do
• Why most civil cases never go to trial
• What it’s really like for clients in the courtroom
• The role of the Montana Supreme Court
• Why nonpartisan courts matter
• What voters should look for in a judge

Whether you’re curious about the legal system or want a better understanding of how court decisions impact your daily life, this episode breaks it all down in a practical, real-world way.

Learn more about Judge Amy Eddy:
https://amyeddyforjustice.com/

—

🎙️ Off The Record with Gerstner Adam Law
Real conversations about law, life, and everything in between.

#Montana #Law #Podcast #Legal #SupremeCourt #Justice #Courtroom #Attorney #Civics

Paul Adam 0:07 Hey, welcome back to another episode of Off The Record with Gerstner Adam Law. Up to this point in our podcast, Colin, this has really just been you and I, you know, in our random musings about the law, kind of whatever we want to talk about. But today is different.

Colin Gerstner 0:25 Yeah, I’m kind of uncomfortable here. We’re in the presence of a Montana Supreme Court candidate. I feel like maybe we’ve made it. I don’t know.

Paul Adam 0:34 I mean, this is a giant step for Off The Record. This is our first ever guest. Yeah, current District Court Judge in Flathead County and running for Montana Supreme Court. So we are honored. We are privileged to have guest Judge Amy Eddy here with us today. If you want to say anything controversial, you want to test it out, we are off the record. We’re off the record, but this, this might also be the smallest audience.

Amy Eddy 0:59 You mean off the record?

Paul Adam 1:01 We are off the record. We’re off the record, but this, this might also be the smallest audience that fair enough connect to, yeah, right. You know, our families subscribe. You know, maybe some close friends. But so, yeah, if you’ve been holding back and you just want to really, you know, test something out with the public, you know, now’s a good time to do it, fair enough, but we’re gonna jump right into it. We’d love to hear, yeah, really, just some background about you. You know, where you come from, where you’re at now, kind of what led you to being a judge.

Colin Gerstner 1:36 Yeah, what’s your story?

Amy Eddy 1:38 Well, I, I’m not from Montana, so we’ll put that on the record. I grew up in a little town called Stanley, Idaho. It’s not too far south of Missoula. Actually, population 70 people year round. I have two younger sisters, and we grew up at a family business. We were snowed in in the wintertime without a snowmobile, which becomes significant because in kindergarten, I got to cross country ski two and a half miles out to the highway to catch a school bus to go to town, to my two room schoolhouse. There was one other student in my grade named Amy, and my mom would ski me out in the morning in the dark, and my dad would meet me in the afternoon and ski me back in so my sisters and I laughed that like one of the best days of our life is when our middle sister broke her leg because we finally got a snowmobile and didn’t have to ski anymore. So I grew up in Idaho. I went to college on a honors and ski racing scholarship for a couple of years, and then I graduated from Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo. But I got to Montana because I went to law school here. So I graduated from the University of Montana. School of Law is what it was called then. And 2001 I was in private practice in Flathead Valley for 15 years at a plaintiff civil litigation practice, just representing ordinary people and businesses and Montanans access to courts. And then I was appointed as a district court judge in 2015 by Governor Bullock. And then I run for 2016, 2018, 2024 for reelection. And then, now this campaign for the Supreme Court.

Paul Adam 3:21 Okay. And I, I don’t want to derail us already, but I didn’t know you were from Stanley, were you a guide on the Middle Fork at all? I’ve been there once, had a phenomenal experience. I have to ask you about that.

Amy Eddy 3:39 Okay, well, since we’re off the record, I never guided on the Middle Fork, but I hung out with a lot of guides on the Middle Fork, and we floated the Middle Fork quite a bit.

Paul Adam 3:47 Yeah, yes.

Paul Adam 3:47 Oh man, that is an incredible area of the world.

Amy Eddy 3:51 It’s a beautiful area. It’s a beautiful area.

Colin Gerstner 3:54 You’re presently a district court judge. Could you just describe for our listeners what that job entails and what you do?

Amy Eddy 4:01 Sure. So just a little reminder for your listeners, there are Municipal Court Judges who have jurisdiction over cities. There are justices of the peace who have jurisdiction within a county over misdemeanor criminal and Small Claims cases, landlord tenant, and then the district court judges. There’s about 54 of us, 56 now, I think, across the state, and we are elected from counties, but we have statewide jurisdiction, and we handle all the felony criminal prosecutions, family law cases, child abuse and neglect, complex civil and then involuntary commitments with people suffering from a severe mental illness, and then probate guardianships, things like that. And then we hear appeals from municipal or Justice Courts, and then our decisions are appealed to the Montana Supreme Court.

Colin Gerstner 4:56 So you’re just a little busy?

 Amy Eddy 4:58 A little busy, I think the District Court Judges as a whole handle about 50,000 cases a year across the state. So it’s an enormous body of work. And to put that in perspective, I think the Montana Supreme Court handles fewer than 800 appeals a year. And so people should be very proud of the work that all the district court judges do, just dispensing justice and resolving disputes every day for people in their communities that never goes up on appeal.

Paul Adam 5:28 Yeah, so, as you know, you know, Colin and I do personal injury, I do workers comp, so I’m, you know, we’ve got our own court system with the workers compensation system, but I guess in all those areas of law, how often are you seeing, you know, personal injury lawsuits in your in your courtroom, not just necessarily being filed and litigated, but actually tried in your courtroom?

Amy Eddy 5:55 Not very often. You know, statistically, I think it’s less than 1% of cases, civil cases that are filed ever go to a jury trial. So you can extrapolate that number out. But I, I don’t know. Actually, the last time I tried a true personal injury case where someone has been physically injured or has died, most of those cases resolve. I do try other types of cases that might have some component of emotional distress damages that go along with them, associated with property disputes, something like that. I just had a jury trial a couple of weeks ago on that.

Paul Adam 6:34 Yeah, I think a lot of our you know prospective clients that call in, or even current clients, where we’re discussing the possibility of trial, or even just the possibility of having to file a lawsuit, suing somebody. I mean, that’s that can be pretty scary. There’s a lot of unknowns there. I’m always, I’m curious, you know, when I get to that part of the conversation about, like, well, here’s how you can prepare, or here’s how you can be, you know, get through this with the least difficulty as possible. You know, what? What could you say to a, you know, a Montana citizen going into a civil jury trial, and, for example, an injury case? What would be what’s your advice? What’s your what’s your thoughts?

Amy Eddy 7:25 Well, I think my first advice is to anyone who thinks they’ve been harmed by someone else, is to consult with a good lawyer, maybe consult with two of them. You know, you get different perspectives and different approaches to things. But you also have to understand that one it’s a long process, depending on the judicial district you’re in, how quickly your lawyer is pressing the case forward. Think of how nervous lawyers are to go into trial sometimes, or to be in a courtroom in front of a judge that is a completely foreign environment for your client, and so most of my advice, honestly, is for lawyers to really remember it is your responsibility to take care of your clients when you’re in the courtroom environment with them, and to prepare them for their depositions and not just say this is what’s going to happen. Happen, excuse me, but walk them through a direct examination. Walk them through a cross examination so they understand that’s what it’s going to feel like. You know, the court system has some people think of them as barriers, but really what we’re trying to do is provide due process so that everyone gets their day in court and it’s adversarial, and people forget that sometimes what that feels like to be the client sitting in the witness stand going over every medical record. They’ve probably never even seen their medical records before. They don’t have any idea what their doctor wrote. All they know is they got a particular diagnosis or need particular treatment in the future. They’ve never read the MRI report. They’ve never looked at their physical therapy notes, and I think for potential litigants, they just need to know they’re under a microscope and all of those things are going to be examined whether they think it might be relevant or not.

Paul Adam 9:26 Yeah, you make it sound kind of ominous. I think Colin and I like to have a little bit of fun, all right, as well. Yes, in the courtroom, I mean, it’s, you know, it’s a show, right?

Amy Eddy 9:40 Yes, I agree.

Paul Adam 9:40 We’ve got a jury. I mean, Colin and I like talking to people some of the best, I think, some of the best trial advice that maybe you and I have ever received. Good friend of the firm, Tim Bechtel, shared with us once that every trial. You need some pizzazz.

Amy Eddy 10:02 Yeah, I mean, it is. You are the advocates, you’re trying to persuade and convince people of the righteousness of your position. So are the attorneys on the other side, and in the middle of that pizzazz and righteousness are people, someone who’s been injured, someone who’s accused of injuring someone, and so I think that part of it, you just have to remember, and you know it is, it can be an arduous process, but usually because it’s worth it. Your clients have a right that they need vindicated, or they need a requesting compensation for and those are all worthy things, but I think it behooves lawyers to walk clients through that so they’re not unprepared. And the other thing I think is important about it also, and I just want to talk for a minute about settlement conferences? The vast majority of cases settle. I do not order any cases, complex civil cases to a settlement conference. Lawyers are professional communicators and you’re professional negotiators. You want to settle your case with defense counsel, go settle your case with defense counsel, but to put your presumably injured plaintiff in a room with a mediator, lawyers and usually a claims adjuster, right? It’s not the individual defendant who’s in control. They have the least knowledge, the least experience. They’re most subject to pressure. Really have to think that one through also.

Paul Adam 11:47 Yeah. I mean, what do you think I would say? Most courts that we appear in require a settlement conference?

Colin Gerstner 11:55 Most definitely, it’s now just, it’s almost part of litigation. So I don’t know if I’ve ever tried a case in front of you. I definitely have not tried a case in front of you. I don’t know if I’ve even had a case filed in front of you, but I can almost guarantee we’d probably mediate it anyway, just part of the motions.

Amy Eddy 12:09 Yeah, but I’m not gonna say you’ve got to mediate it by this date. Mediate it. Don’t mediate it. I don’t care. Mediate it under whatever conditions you want.

Paul Adam 12:19 Yeah

Amy Eddy 12:20 If the defense isn’t making you an offer that you think is within the range of settlement, why do you have to go spend a couple $1,000 to sit there and put pressure on your client for a case that isn’t going to settle? Yeah, right. And I mean, goes the other way, obviously for the defense as well.

Paul Adam 12:38 Yeah. I think what that also does is, you know, Colin and I talk a lot of times before we even file a lawsuit, you know, is this a is this a case that we could take the distance? And the answer has to be yes. I mean, because you you can’t rely on that settlement conference requirement as a backstop and be like, well, at least we don’t have to present this case to a jury, you know, I like that. I like that. That type of a scheduling order that just lets it ride all the way to a trial.

Amy Eddy 13:10 You know, I schedule cases for trial, usually within about a year, so it’s a pretty short period of time anyway, and so go to mediation whenever you want.

Paul Adam 13:23 Yeah

Amy Eddy 13:24 And if you don’t want to, because you don’t think it’s worth it to you, I’m not going to make you.

Paul Adam 13:28 Right

Amy Eddy 13:28 Either side.

Paul Adam 13:29 I want to get into just kind of your thoughts. I mean, one going from a district court judge to the Montana Supreme Court. Kind of, what’s your you know, how do you see that transition working? And then, what led you to the decision to actually kind of take the next step and serve on the Supreme Court?

Amy Eddy 13:57 So I’ve been on the District Court bench a little over 10 years now, and in that time, I have handled more than 10,000 cases. So I’ve had a large volume of work that’s been pretty diverse. I’ve handled cases for my colleagues all across the state. When they’ve needed help, they’ve been substituted or had to recuse themselves. For some reason, I sat with the Supreme Court on a couple of cases where one of their justices had to recuse themselves. I started the asbestos Claims Court, which was for all the Libby claimants who had been exposed to asbestos arising out of WR Graces Mining operations back in Libby in the day. I have sat on jury instruction commissions. I sit on the District Court Council. I have had a lot of internal involvement in the functioning of the judiciary. So I feel prepared and Montanans deserve a Supreme Court justice who has that experience, who’s fair, nonpartisan, impartial and really not afraid to guard the constitution that we have. We have really unique individual rights under the Montana constitution that we do not enjoy under the United States Constitution, and that our neighbors, you know, in Idaho or the Dakotas or Wyoming don’t enjoy either, and we don’t think about that enough in our day to day activities. Of course, most people aren’t driving around thinking about the Constitution like some of us are, but as we look at those individual rights and liberties, that’s the main reason this moment in time.

Colin Gerstner 15:47 So why should Montanans vote for you?

Amy Eddy 15:49 Because I am the experienced nonpartisan candidate who is not afraid to defend the Montana constitution. We have been running this campaign since May, we’ve been all over the state. My husband and I lived in the car for three weeks in the fall and did a big eastern Montana tour. I laugh at people, and I say this sometimes when we’re in Flathead Valley, people think that Billings is on the east side of the state, like it’s actually just in the middle of the state. There’s a whole other half of the state out there, and everywhere we went, people are committed to non-partisan, independent courts and a government that functions, and they’re entitled to that.

Colin Gerstner 16:30 So besides this podcast, what’s been your favorite moment of being on the campaign trail?

Amy Eddy 16:33 Well, there are two that stick out. I was at a bar in uptown Butte, and the bartender printed my campaign logo on the film of a Guinness. And I thought, wow, I don’t know if it’s going to get better than this.

Colin Gerstner 16:53 That’s a compliment.

Paul Adam 16:53 That’s a great endorsement.

Amy Eddy 16:55 I was with Judge Murnion, who’s retired now in Forsyth, drinking coffee and playing cards with a group of his friends, which was really great. I teach at high school government classes when we’re on the campaign trail about the Montana Constitution, because no one learns about it in school. We teach out of national textbooks. And Mr. Faulhaber up in Sidney, his high school class, part of his class is having civic engagement is part of the credit that you have to receive. And they all came back after volleyball and football practice and great engaged group of kids.

Paul Adam 17:20 Yeah.

Amy Eddy 17:21 So it’s just been fun, that part of it just meeting lots of different people all over and we’ve been warmly, warmly received.

Colin Gerstner 17:26 How do you view the role of a Montana Supreme Court justice?

Amy Eddy 17:26 Well, ultimately, what a Montana Supreme Court Justice is doing is they’re reviewing the work of district court judges like myself to see whether there’s any error. Did I make an evidentiary mistake? Did I misjudge the credibility of a witness? Was there really evidence to support the ruling that the judge made? That’s the vast majority of the work of the Montana Supreme Court. Is just ensuring that trial court judges, district court judges, did not make a mistake, and if so, reversing the case so it can be fixed or affirming, saying yes, this was the correct decision. Then, of course, every once in a while, you have constitutional challenges to particular statutes and particular cases, and then it’s the role of the Supreme Court to decide whether or not that statute is, in fact, unconstitutional. That by and large, is the role of the Supreme Court, but there’s all these other things they do. You know, the Access to Justice Commission that tries to provide resources for people who cannot afford a lawyer to come into court, drafting forms that people who are self represented can use. We have commissions on technology and evidence. There’s many, many things that the justices do to better. You know, the functioning of both the Supreme Court and the State Bar of Montana.

Paul Adam 19:15 Do you have a law clerk right now?

Amy Eddy 19:17 I do, and I will share that. When I first started this job, I hired a new law clerk every single year, a brand new graduate every single year. And if they were sitting at this podcast, they would say, Yeah, my judge is way more controlling, because that’s not, you know, we would sit down and talk it through and really trying to train them for what I was looking for what they should be looking for, if the deposition or discovery, whatever we were looking at, was not quite what it should have been. I said when you’re in practice, this is what you need to pay attention to. Unfortunately, housing prices got so expensive in the Flathead Valley, I can’t hire new clerks out of school anymore. We just don’t pay them enough even to make rent in the Flathead Valley. So I was very lucky. One of my colleagues retired, and I was able to inherit his career law clerk, and that’s worked out great. So yeah, I do have a law clerk, and we work pretty closely together to move through all that work. I always thought that, and if I’m able to do this when I’m on the Supreme Court, we have law clerks as well, okay? And I would love to be able to hire a law clerk who had already clerked for a district court judge, you know, to have that because I think that, as you guys know the trial court record. It’s complicated. It’s extensive. It’s not always reflected on appeals, sometimes, depending on how the case is taken up.

Paul Adam 20:51 Yeah

Colin Gerstner 20:52 Do you know? Does the Supreme Court does each judge get two clerks or just one?

Amy Eddy 20:57 I don’t know, actually

Colin Gerstner 20:59 In federal court when I was there Judge Watters. We had two law clerks, yes. And so when I was a career, then I was a term, yes, there for two years. And is, I mean, they’re lucky enough to be able to do that, but, you know, it’s nice to kind of rotate in the the terms we got the the wise career clerk to oversee it all.

Amy Eddy 21:18 Yes. I mean, that would be ideal. And the state system certainly does not have the budget of the federal judiciary. I think the this goes back a few years, but I think the entire federal judiciary in Montana, all the judges, all the magistrates, combined, handled fewer cases than some of the busy district court judges. So that just gives you, you know, perspective on on the scale of what state state judges are doing. It’s the vast majority of justice in the state.

Colin Gerstner 21:57 I call the state district court the engine room. It’s real stuff. So that impacts everyday lives. You’re dealing with family law issues, your standard state felonies, stuff like that. And so it is, I think it’s the most important court in our even federal state appellate court. I think the state district court is the most important court to Montanans.

 Amy Eddy 22:20 Yeah. As much as I want to be on the Supreme Court, I’m going to miss doing trial court work. I like being around lawyers and the people and providing resolution to those kind of every day. I don’t say that to minimize but you know, people have lots of disagreements they can’t resolve on their own, that they need someone to help them out with.

Paul Adam 22:45 This is great for Colin and I to be able to talk to you and, you know, we’ve got a lot of context for what you’re saying. But I think a lot of the listeners out there know the difference between the court systems and what all the courts do is completely foreign, yes, but what’s not foreign is how that affects them in their day-to-day life. Or, you know what thing, what rights do they have, or what responsibilities do they have that they may not even realize originated from a Supreme Court decision.

Amy Eddy 23:21 Yes

Paul Adam 23:22 Or, you know, a state court decision. Does anything come to mind that you could point to and be like, hey, Montanans, here’s a decision that is really important. And here’s why anything like that?

Amy Eddy 23:38 Well, I think there’s a collection of them, just for people moving through their lives, you know you want to get divorced or you have a child custody issue that you’ve got to work through that impacts a lot of families, and even if you’re not the one getting divorced or in the dispute, maybe you’re a grandparent, or maybe you’re an aunt or an uncle who is taking care of kids for a period of time, or maybe there’s been a child abuse and neglect allegation and so someone else is taking the children for a period of time. You know, parents have rights. Grandparents have rights, obviously, to parent, and kids have a right to be safe and live in stable homes. So there’s a lot of work that’s been done by the legislature and laws that they’ve passed to make sure that happens, things that the court has to consider in the best interest of a child, and then a lot of Supreme Court decisions evaluating that you could turn to the criminal side of things, when is a search warrant valid for your home when is law enforcement authorized to pull you over? You know the Supreme Court makes a lot of decisions impacting search and seizure, and I’m not suggesting all your clients are out drunk driving and taking cops on high speed chases, but there’s a lot of that body. That impacts, you know, if not everyday people, certainly law enforcement, that’s coming out all the time, and in the way they’re investigating cases.

Paul Adam 25:10 How do, how do the common everyday Montana and how do they, how do they find out what the Supreme Court’s even doing? I mean, it seems there’s so many layers between someone out there and the Supreme Court.

Amy Eddy 25:24 So I always like to say the judicial branch is the most transparent branch of the government. Courts are open to the public, so if I’m in court virtually, maybe not on a child abuse case, you can come to court. You can watch how I conduct myself, how I treat the people. If I’m ruling from the bench, which I do often, whether my rulings make sense to you, if I issue a written order, it’s public, you can get a copy of it and read it. If I have a case that’s appealed to the Montana Supreme Court you can get on the Supreme Court’s website. You can see what the lawyer said about me. You can look at the Supreme Court’s opinions, the clerk of the Montana Supreme Court keeps a running summary of Supreme Court decisions, so you can look and just see what types of cases the Supreme Court is ruling on how they’re ruling. There’s information on court statistics. How much work are we doing? How quickly are we doing it? Are we getting substituted, you know? So it takes a little more work, but the quality of information is better than, you know, commercial, yeah, yeah. The other thing I think it’s important for people to remember is, under the Montana constitution, we have a specific right to participate in government decisions before they’re made, and a right to know how government decisions were made, whether that’s getting copies of emails or, you know, through public information requests, we take that for granted a little bit, but when I was reading the paper this morning, And I’m, you know, not taking a position, good, bad or even, but we have the citizens of Laurel who are petitioning to recall their mayor because they believe, I don’t know if it’s correct or not that the mayor was making decisions about a site for a mental health facility without the public being able to participate in that decision, right? Or the I don’t know if it was the governor’s office, but there were changes in rules regarding where you’re able to have a protest or a rally on Capitol grounds. The 2025 legislature passed the Montana Land Use Planning Act, which you know its purpose is to streamline development and decrease the cost of development, not have as many public hearings. And there’s people who are opposed to that, because we have this right to participate. And so there are some things that we take for granted. You know, when we have these public hearings or public comment, that’s because we have that right under the Montana constitution that the Supreme Court is enforced most of the time.

Colin Gerstner 28:19 So another thing that we unfortunately take for granted now is being blasted in the face with campaign literature in commercials every fall.

Amy Eddy 28:29 Don’t hold it against me.

Colin Gerstner 28:30 Yeah. So Montana’s judicial elections are non partisan.

Amy Eddy 28:35 They are

Colin Gerstner 28:35 But we’ve seen more and more money dumped into our Supreme Court races.

Amy Eddy 28:40 Yes.

Colin Gerstner 28:40 And recently the legislature, they passed a bill that removed a long standing ban on political parties contributing directly to judicial candidates. They did. How do you see that factoring into your race?

Amy Eddy 28:55 Well, I’ve said I’m not accepting any money from political parties. I’ve said that from the beginning, the Montana constitution is silent on whether judicial elections should be partisan or nonpartisan, but for almost 100 years, judicial elections in Montana have been nonpartisan, and that comes out of our history from the copper kings and Butte and buying and selling judicial seats, that has been completely uncontroversial until the last few legislative cycles, there’s been a big push by the Republican Party, primarily to make judicial elections partisan, that the voters are entitled to that information, assuming it’s even relevant to the job that judges do, which I would say it’s not. Now political parties have First Amendment Free Speech rights that’s been established, and so part of this is permitting them to contribute to judicial campaigns. But I think that’s completely inappropriate with my obligations under the Code of Judicial Conduct as well. So statutorily, I have to run a nonpartisan campaign separately under the code of Judicial Conduct, I cannot accept an endorsement of a political party or of a partisan candidate. Now, oddly, endorsements are different than campaign contributions. The law federal law primarily considers those two things to be different, but for that reason, I’m committed to courts being nonpartisan. I do not believe that courts should be held captive by a political party. I don’t believe that a judge should be expected to advance a partisan political agenda. I think that undermines the public’s confidence in the judiciary, the appearance of judges being improper, certainly, when I’m making a decision, I don’t want to be thinking, how am I going to earn a standing ovation at a political party convention, right? I want to be asking, what is the constitution demand? And that is not a partisan question.

Colin Gerstner 31:20 So Montana many judicial positions are elected.

Amy Eddy 31:23 Yes.

Colin Gerstner 31:23 And so when somebody is evaluating who to vote for, let’s say a district court judge, nonpartisan, a lot of times, there’s not a lot of stuff out there about the candidates.

Amy Eddy 31:32 Yes.

Colin Gerstner 31:33 What should Montanans be looking for when evaluating which judge they should vote for?

Amy Eddy 31:38 What I would evaluate is going straight to the candidate’s website or a gathering that the candidate is doing so you can hear directly from them, with the input or influx, I guess I should say, of outside money into judicial elections. Candidates don’t control the message. We can’t compete, right? We can’t put up the types of television commercials or literature. We just simply can’t raise enough money in Montana to do that, and so I would just really encourage voters to go to the candidate’s website, go to a gathering that the candidate is putting together, and ask lawyers. Lawyers are the ones with expertise. Frankly, on judges, some of the best expertise you’ve appeared in front of a lot of judges, probably all over the state. You’ve worked for some of them. You’ve seen their orders that have been circulated around. And I think lawyers are really in the best position to be giving out that type of information. So I’d encourage people to call a lawyer or a judge if you know one.

Paul Adam 32:44 Yeah. I always would have assumed you know the best experience to be, to be coming a Supreme Court justice is District Court experience. You don’t always see that. I mean, sometimes you see, you know applicants, you know Supreme Court coming from different areas or different backgrounds? Yeah, I’m just, I’m always curious, as you know, what else is out there, aside from District Court experience, that could be helpful in that role or not?

Amy Eddy 33:21 Well, I think you can look, you know, Justice Baker, who’s retiring, and that’s whose seat I’m running to replace. You know, she worked primarily as a government lawyer and did a lot of work that gave her a lot of insight. Our new Chief Justice, Corey Swanson, he came from a county attorney’s office and was a prosecutor, and so being a district court judge does give you some unique insight and experience. But I don’t think it’s the only qualifying thing, either. And we’ve had good lawyers run and win election from the Supreme Court. We seem to be in a pattern right now where judges are running primarily for these seats. In the last election, that was certainly, you know, the circumstance, not all of them were successful. So I think that the court is better when you have a variety of backgrounds also. So I think being a district court judge is excellent experience. It’s not necessarily the only experience, though.

Paul Adam 34:22 Yeah, and we probably, I mean, we could talk to you all day, and we, we probably have time for another one or two questions. You have any anything else burning that you got to get out for Judge Eddy before we let her go.

Colin Gerstner 34:34 And I have some really tough questions.

Paul Adam 34:37 Give her the hardest question of the podcast right here, speechless, where she just is not going to have a good answer.

Colin Gerstner 34:49 I’ve given this question a lot of thought. What is one legal phrase you wish you could just get rid of forever?

Amy Eddy 34:54 Originalism.

Paul Adam 34:55 Originalism.

Colin Gerstner 34:56 Oh, okay

Paul Adam 34:58 You that you had zero. Hesitation about that.

Amy Eddy 35:03 Well, I don’t believe that the Constitution as a founding document is frozen in time, and that we’re supposed to look back 250 years at the intent of those individuals as far as what the Constitution means today. We in Montana, so it’s a good thing. I guess I’m not on the United States Supreme Court, but we in Montana have a constitution that we adopted in 1972 before we adopted the Constitution in 1972 the Montana Supreme Court really had taken the position that the Constitution was not a straight jacket. It was a living document that should be able to be applied to modern times. And you see that if you read the transcripts of the Constitutional Convention that they wanted those delegates to create a constitution for all time. The only way you can do that is if you can pull the Constitution with you into modern times. And that’s how our constitution is designed. It’s been amended 38 times. So it’s not difficult to amend. We can modernize it. Every generation of Montanans has had an opportunity to participate in that development. But then separately, every 20 years, we vote on whether we want to form a new constitutional convention to rewrite it. And every time we’ve voted, we’ve said no. In 2010 the last time we voted on this, 54 of 56 counties said no, and I take that is the public re ratifying the constitution, re ratifying the way it’s been applied, interpreted, whether that’s through the judicial, legislative or executive branches.

Paul Adam 37:02 No, that’s Wow.

Amy Eddy 37:03 Did you expect that? What’s your word?

Colin Gerstner 37:10 Well, I guess it was, I was gonna go broad, more broad. Oh, these Latin phrases. I hate it, yeah. So I just this morning I was writing a subpoena. I mean, there’s like, subpoena deuces tecum subpoena ad. I’m gonna mispronounce it, testific adam?

Amy Eddy 37:24 Voir dire

Colin Gerstner 37:25 And so instead of like a subpoena deuces tequila, we call it like a subpoena to produce, right? Not the call. It just seems like we’re making the law less accessible

Amy Eddy 37:35 A little archaic.

Paul Adam 37:37 Yeah

 Amy Eddy 37:37 But it’s got a long, rich history, too.

Paul Adam 37:39 Yeah, we can’t, we can’t cancel the Latin but I think we can cancel originalism. I think that’s official. Originalism is canceled.

Colin Gerstner 37:48 Victim of cancel culture.

Paul Adam 37:51 I mean, if we want to modernize things, here we go. Originalism is canceled. You’ve heard it from Judge Eddy.

Colin Gerstner 37:58 I do have one more question. Is that okay?

Paul Adam 38:02 No, I’m not too strict here. You go ahead.

Colin Gerstner 38:04 If you were at a bar, let’s say the Red Door. I don’t know what your plans are tonight, but if you’re going to the Red Door and you were thrust up on stage to the karaoke stage, what song would you pick to sing?

Amy Eddy 38:16 It would never happen to me.

Paul Adam 38:17 It might though. In an alternate universe you might have to sing karaoke.

Amy Eddy 38:24 No, there is no alternate universe where I will ever sing karaoke. It’s just not gonna happen.

Colin Gerstner 38:30 Oh my gosh. So I have four kids, I’m always trying to teach them life lessons. And I think maybe the most important life lesson I’ve given them is that you got to have a pocket song, because you never know when you’re thrown up on stage. You know it might happen anytime. And so you gotta have a song you can go to that’s gonna get the crowd fired up.

Amy Eddy 38:51 Well, when I go home and tell my dad to subscribe to your podcast, gonna be like, Hey, Dad, you didn’t tell me to get a song.

Paul Adam 38:58 Yeah. But as the credits roll and the podcast fades to black. We’re going to edit in a song. Oh yeah. And that is going to be your clue that we have chosen your pocket song.

Amy Eddy 39:10 Okay.

Paul Adam 39:11 We have chosen your karaoke song. No, Judge Eddy, we’re again. We’re honored, we’re humbled. We really appreciate you coming on the podcast.

Amy Eddy 39:19 Thanks for having me, it’s been fun.

Colin Gerstner 39:19 If any of the listeners want to learn more about you or your campaign, how can they do that?

 Amy Eddy 39:25 amyeddyforjustice.com

Paul Adam 39:27 It’s as easy as that. Thank you again. Till next time.