Two differently qualified candidates vie for magistrate judge post

May 6—Two Democrats campaigning to fill a vacant seat in the Santa Fe County Magistrate Court have both worked in the judicial system for many years, albeit in different capacities.

Magistrate Morgan Wood — whom Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham appointed in July to a vacancy created by the resignation of former Magistrate Judge Dev Atma Khalsa — is an attorney who was working as a Children's Court prosecutor in the District Attorney's Office before her appointment. She previously served as a public defender for more than a decade.

Under state law she must be elected to the position to remain on the bench.

Her challenger in the June 4 Democratic primary election, Melissa Mascareñas, has said she dreamed of going to law school as a teen but changed course after becoming a single mother at 17. She earned a bachelor's degree in business administration at the College of Santa Fe and then began working as a court monitor in the First Judicial District for nine years and a paralegal in the state Supreme Court for four years.

For the last 17 years of her career, she worked as a paralegal in the state Environment Department's Office of the General Counsel, where she was also chief records manager until she retired in 2020.

No other major party candidates are seeking the job, so the winner of the Democratic primary is likely to secure the position.

State law doesn't require magistrate judges to have a law degree, and Mascareñas doesn't have one.

However, she said she's learned to do legal research — and "absorbed the right way to do things" — from judges and justices she's worked alongside over the years.

She said in a recent interview she's the best choice for the job because she was born and raised in the area and knows the community.

Allowing appointees to stay on the bench would essentially subvert the will of the people in choosing their own representatives, Mascareñas wrote in a candidate questionnaire. Electing a layperson such as herself would ensure the Magistrate Court remains a "people's court," presided over by someone who knows the community's concerns, she added.

"If a person knows the community, there are things that a judge can do to better work with a community to help solve issues," she said, noting she's heard from residents that an increase in shoplifting, DWIs and evictions related to a lack of affordable housing are among their top concerns.

Wood said her formal legal training and expertise make her the better candidate. Personal connections or assumptions about the community's concerns regarding issues that come before the court have no place in the courtroom, she added.

"The law isn't about who you are," Wood said in a recent interview. "The law is the law is the law."

She said, "We need to be a court that has authority and that has knowledge. You don't want to be swayed by personalities or feelings. It needs to be just clear cut, clear eyed."

As for Magistrate Court being the people's court, Wood differs from her opponent. When she worked as an attorney in Magistrate Court and was the only attorney in the room, she said, it was difficult to argue certain cases based on the rule of law. Some decisions eventually were appealed to state District Court, where a judge with a law degree would correctly interpret the law and ultimately overturn the rulings, added.

Many of the people who appear in Magistrate Court — where the judges hear cases involving traffic violations, drunken driving, felony preliminary hearings and landlord disputes — also aren't represented by an attorney, Wood said, so her legal expertise makes her better equipped to guide them through the process.

Wood has never campaigned for elected office before and says she's running for her job, not to beat Mascareñas.

Mascareñas was one of four people who sought election to the magistrate judge position in 2022. She placed second with 30% of the vote.

She attributed her loss in part to people not realizing how important it is to vote in primary elections and said she's been reminding voters to go to the polls while on the campaign trail, in an effort secure the win this time.

Khalsa won the race with 40% of the vote but resigned in May 2023 after he flipped his vehicle off an Interstate 25 off-ramp near St. Francis Drive and was charged with DWI.

His resignation — and vow to never seek an elected judicial position again — was part of an agreement with the Judicial Standards Commission that allowed him to avoid further discipline in connection with the charge, to which he later pleaded no contest and was sentenced to probation.

Whoever is elected to the Division 2 vacancy left by Khalsa this year will win only the right to finish his four-year-term, which ends in 2026. The judge would then need to run for election again for their own four-year term, and would face an election every four years after that.