Running For Judicial Office

In a case where the Kansas Supreme Court answered five questions certified by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, the court dealt with the propriety of a candidate for judicial office in responding to a written questionnaire about the candidates views. The court concludes:

…judges and candidates for judicial office may choose to answer issue-relatedquestionnaires (though they are not in any way required to do so) to the extent that thequestionnaires call for the candidate’s personal views on disputed legal or political issues. Canons5A(3)(d)(i) and (ii) do prohibit a judicial candidate from answering issue-related questions,however, when giving responses would bind the candidate as a judge to a resolution of aparticular case, controversy, or issue within a particular controversy. We stress that in answeringany questionnaire, it is advisable–as the code’s comments explain–that a candidate who makes apublic statement “should emphasize . . . the candidate’s duty to uphold the law regardless of his orher personal views” and to remain ever mindful of the impartiality that is essential to the judicialoffice.

The court further opines that a judicial candidate may not personally solicit signatures for a nominating petition:

  The underlying facts in this case illustrate the importance of determining whether a judicialcandidate’s conduct amounts to a solicitation of public support. When a judicial candidate engagesin conduct discussed previously by personally seeking signatures on a nominatingpetition (ratherthan having his or her campaign solicit such signatures), such conduct is impermissible in thisstate, as it amounts to a personal request for the signor’s endorsement of the judicial candidate.But when a newspaper or other media source submits questions to a judicial candidate and thecandidate responds, and this exchange results in an endorsement, we conclude that the candidateis not actively seeking support or endorsement in violation of the canons. In the first example, thejudicial candidate is actively seeking an endorsement. In the second, the request originated fromthe media source, not the candidate.

  Judges and judicial candidates are not permitted under the solicitations clause topersonally and actively seek endorsements of their judicial candidacies. Judges and judicialcandidates may respond, however, to requests regarding their viewpoints on disputed issues, aslong as such responses do not otherwise violate the canons.

(Mike Frisch)