This is the first U.S. Supreme Court case involving
judicial campaign conduct since 2002's Republican Party of Minnesota v. White.
Rules that govern
judicial campaign conduct are generally established by state courts, and sometimes adopted by state legislatures.
For example, rules limiting
judicial campaign conduct have been attacked as unduly restrictive of candidate's free speech rights.
Not exact matches
According to a 2011 survey
conducted by Justice at Stake, a non-partisan organization whose mission is to ensure an impartial court system, 83 percent of the public believe that
judicial campaign contributions influence judges» decisions to some degree (National Registered Voters Frequency Questionnaire, October 2011).
The plaintiffs challenged eight restrictions on
judicial conduct: 1) the prohibition on
judicial candidates
campaigning as a member of a political organization, 2) the prohibition on
judicial candidates making speeches for or against political organizations or candidates, 3) the ban on
judicial candidates making contributions to political causes or candidates, 4) the prohibition on
judicial candidates from publicly endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, 5) the prohibition on judges from acting as a leader or holding office in a policitical organization, 6) the prohibition on
judicial candidates knowingly or recklessly making false statements during
campaigns, 7) the ban on
judicial candidates making misleading statements, and 8) the prohibition on candidates making pledges, promises, or committments in connection with cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court.
On April 29th, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Williams - Yulee v. Florida Bar, upholding the constitutionality of Florida's canon of
judicial conduct prohibiting
judicial candidates from personally soliciting
campaign contributions.
Trends in how
judicial campaigns are
conducted and are in the methods by which states choose to select their judges merit close scrutiny.
(A) A
judicial candidate subject to public election may establish a
campaign committee to manage and
conduct a
campaign for the candidate, subject to the provisions of this Code.
Williams - Yulee's case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court, and the question it will decide is whether a rule of
judicial conduct that prohibits candidates for
judicial office from personally soliciting
campaign funds violates the First Amendment.
Section 7C (2) authorizes candidates facing active opposition in a merit retention election for the same
judicial office to
campaign together and
conduct a joint
campaign designed to educate the public on merit retention and each candidate's views as to why he or she should be retained in office, to the extent not otherwise prohibited by Florida law.
A successful candidate, whether or not an incumbent, is subject to
judicial discipline for his or her
campaign conduct; an unsuccessful candidate who is a lawyer is subject to lawyer discipline for his or her
campaign conduct.
The Wisconsin
Judicial Commission filed charges against Gableman yesterday over his
conduct during his
campaign for the high - court seat earlier this year.
Since the LCA has and will take meaningful positions and
conduct lobbying activities with respect to legislation such as that affecting
judicial compensation and benefits,
judicial campaign financing and / or other legislation important to the American litigation processes, IRC Reg.