North Huntingdon attorney to seek seat on Common Pleas in Westmoreland County
Meagan Bilik DeFazio said her campaign for Westmoreland County judge is all about families.
DeFazio, 38, of North Huntingdon announced this week she will make her second attempt to win a seat on the county's Common Pleas Court bench.
“This is a place where I can do a lot of good. I am very passionate about our family courts and anything involving the protection of children,” DeFazio said.
DeFazio works as an attorney for the Greensburg law firm of Loughran Mlakar & Bilik and focuses on property rights cases. She also serves as an adjunct professor at the Duquesne University School of Law.
DeFazio ran for judge in 2009 when she finished third in the general election, losing a seat on the court by 500 votes.
During that election, DeFazio ran as a registered Democrat. She changed her party registration to Republican last year.
“I ran with conservative values. My campaign hasn't changed. A year ago I decided I couldn't stand behind the liberal agenda I see on a national level. My registration as a Republican is more in line with my personal values,” DeFazio said.
DeFazio is seeking to replace Judge John Driscoll, who retired at the end of last year.
She will be joined on the ballot by Democrat Bill McCabe and Republican Harry Smail. All three candidates said they intend to cross-file and seek both the Democratic and Republican nominations in the May 21 primary.
Rich Cholodofsky is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-830-6293 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.