Opinion 160
(This Opinion discusses a prior version of the Canons of Judicial Conduct; the most comparable current rules are 2-1.1 Compliance with the Law; and 2-4.1 Political Conduct of Judges and Judicial Candidates in General, Subdivision (D).)
Issue:
May a judge publicly express an opinion on the desirability of retention of a specific non-partisan judge?
Discussion:
Supreme Court Rule 2, Canon 7, allows a non-partisan judge whose candidacy has drawn active opposition to campaign in response thereto.
Canon 7A(4) provides that, “a judge should not engage in any other political activity except on behalf of measures to improve the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice.”
In the opinion of the Commission, while a judge may publicly endorse or criticize the non-partisan court plan in an effort to “improve the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice," he may not publicly endorse or recommend against the retention of any specific judge as such conduct would be engaging in other political activity.
(Dated: August 18, 1992)
COMMISSION ON RETIREMENT, REMOVAL AND DISCIPLINE
OPINION 160
OPINION 160
Issue:
May a judge publicly express an opinion on the desirability of retention of a specific non-partisan judge?
Discussion:
Supreme Court Rule 2, Canon 7, allows a non-partisan judge whose candidacy has drawn active opposition to campaign in response thereto.
Canon 7A(4) provides that, “a judge should not engage in any other political activity except on behalf of measures to improve the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice.”
In the opinion of the Commission, while a judge may publicly endorse or criticize the non-partisan court plan in an effort to “improve the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice," he may not publicly endorse or recommend against the retention of any specific judge as such conduct would be engaging in other political activity.
(Dated: August 18, 1992)