Suffolk County District Attorney Rachel Rollins is hailing a decision issued earlier Monday by the state’s highest court vindicating her office in a simmering dispute between the progressive DA and a municipal court judge.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in a decision released Monday, granted a request by the DA’s office for emergency relief by vacating charges against Roderick Webber, one of 34 counter-protesters of a “Straight Pride” parade arrested by Boston police officers on Aug. 31. Two other participants in the parade were also arrested.

The SJC declared that Boston Municipal Court Judge Richard Sinnott had "no authority to 'deny'" the prosecution's decision to cease prosecution of Webber.

In a brief press conference Monday, Rollins told reporters the SJC’s decision was merely stating what “anyone with a law degree” should already have known.

Rollins did not criticize Sinnott by name, but implied that Sinnott had acted out of contempt for the progressive agenda on which she was elected.

“Judges are appointed, DAs are elected,” Rollins said. “No one judge gets to impose their opinion over what the people of Suffolk want.”

Rollins, known for her commitment to not prosecute lower-level crimes, condemned Sinnott's refusal to dismiss charges against the counter-protester, who was not accused of violent behavior, when he and many other counter-protesters were arraigned on Sept. 3. Prosecutors did pursue charges against eight counter-protesters alleged to have acted violently.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys alike were stunned when Municipal Judge Richard Sinnott refused to accept prosecutors’ motions to drop charges. Rollins, backed by legal experts and advocacy groups, including the ACLU of Massachusetts, said the judge had overstepped and had no authority to reject the prosecution’s decision to drop charges in some cases.

In an emergency petition to the SJC, Rollins asked the court to rule that the judge acted in error. The SJC’s ruling granted that request.

According to the SJC's decision, the court found error with the judge's ruling that the counter-protester's actions "interfered with the marchers' exercise of their rights to free speech," finding instead that "there were no specific 'victims' to notify" regarding the prosecutor's decision to cease prosecution.

Even if there had been a victim, the ruling continues, Sinnott had "no authority to 'deny'" the order to stop prosecution.

Chris Basso, the Andover attorney representing Webber, told WGBH News that Webber is "thrilled" with the SJC's ruling, and that "his ability to protest nonviolently and the ability of others to protest nonviolently has been vindicated."

Basso said that the alleged disorderly conduct for which Webber was arrested was simply him "engaging in political speech."

"To even suggest that those about whom one makes political speech are the speaker's victims is just very, very troubling for the concept of democracy in general," Basso said.

The ACLU of Massachusetts' legal director, Matt Segal, said in a statement that the decision "upholds the rule of law and the separation of powers that is so vital to our justice system."

"When the people of Massachusetts give prosecutors a mandate to reform the criminal legal system by declining to prosecute certain cases, prosecutors must be allowed to fulfill that mandate," Segal said. "This decision confirms they can."

WGBH News' Mark Herz contributed to this report.