ABA COMMISSION RELEASES DRAFT REVISIONS
TO JUDICIAL ETHICS CODE RULES ABOUT POLITICAL ACTIVITY

CHICAGO, Jan 28, 2005 -- The American Bar Association's joint commission proposing revisions to the Model Code of Judicial Conduct today released new draft rules on political activity by judges and judicial candidates, covered in Canon 5 of the existing code. Its proposals would continue to restrict judges from engaging in politics, except during campaigns for election or appointment, and even then would confine judges' activity as closely as permitted under recent court rulings.

"Government has a compelling interest in maintaining the impartiality, integrity and independence of the judiciary, and assuring public confidence in these attributes of the judiciary," said Mark I. Harrison, commission chair. "The new code provisions narrowly tailor restrictions on the political and campaign activities of both judges and candidates for judicial office, in order to recognize their First Amendment rights while still serving that compelling interest."

The draft revisions by the Joint Commission to Evaluate the Model Code of Judicial Conduct would restrict conduct to varying degrees based on whether and under what circumstances a person is seeking judicial office.

The first provision, applying to judges who are not candidates for judicial office, would prohibit them from engaging in specific types of political activity, whether directly or through others. They could not lead or hold office in political organizations, publicly speak for or against political organizations, publicly endorse or oppose candidates for public office, attend meetings or other events sponsored by political organizations or candidates for public office, or solicit funds for, pay assessments to, contribute to or purchase tickets for events sponsored by political organizations or candidates for public office.

The next provision would apply to candidates for election or appointment to judicial office, including incumbent judges. It would retain prohibitions on leading or holding office in political organizations, publicly endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and soliciting funds for, paying assessments to, contributing to or purchasing tickets for events sponsored by political organizations or candidates.

The provision also would add prohibitions on candidates knowingly making any false or misleading statement regarding any candidate for judicial office; making any comment that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or fairness of a pending or impending court proceeding; making any pledges, promises or commitments with respect to cases, controversies or issues likely to come before the court that would be inconsistent with impartial performance of adjudicative duties; manifesting bias or prejudice based upon a person's race, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status; personally soliciting or accepting campaign contributions; or using or permitting the use of campaign contributions for anyone's private benefit.

For candidates seeking judicial office in partisan public elections, specific exceptions would allow more political activity. One would permit such candidates to establish campaign committees to solicit and accept campaign contributions in behalf of the candidate. A separate rule would govern how such committees could operate, establishing dollar limits on contributions, restricting the time before and after an election during which the committee could operate, and establishing disclosure requirements.

Candidates in partisan elections also could speak to gatherings on their own behalf, attend meetings or events sponsored by political organizations, publicly identify themselves as members of or candidates of political organizations, purchase tickets to events sponsored by political organizations, appear in media advertisements and distribute campaign literature supporting their own candidacies, and publicly endorse or oppose candidates running for other judgeships in the same judicial office.

The proposed new language for Canon 5 is posted, along with previously released revisions proposed to Canons 1 through 4, on the ABA Web site at www.abanet.org/judicialethics/drafts.html. The current version of the model code is posted at www.abanet.org/cpr/mcjc/mcjc_home.html. Comments should be directed by March 15 to commission counsel Eileen Gallagher at gallaghE@staff.abanet.org or at the ABA Justice Center, 321 N. Clark St., Chicago, IL 60610.

With more than 400,000 members, the American Bar Association is the largest voluntary professional membership organization in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding   around the world of the importance of the rule of law in a democratic society.

Archived Releases | Media Relations Home | ABA Network Home