Opinion 178
(This Opinion discusses a prior version of the Canons of Judicial Conduct; the most comparable current rules are 2-4.2 Campaign Conduct of Judges and Judicial Candidates, Subdivisions (A)(2) & (B); and 2-4.1 Political Conduct of Judges and Judicial Candidates in General, Subdivision (B).)
Issue:
May a judge retain leftover campaign funds from one judicial election to the next judicial election?
Discussion:
Supreme Court Rule 2 Canon 5B(2) requires that: “A candidate shall not use or permit the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit of the candidate or members of the candidate’s family.”
VAMS § 130.034 provides methods of disposing of leftover campaign funds.
In the opinion of the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline, in the absence of a statute to the contrary, there is nothing in the Code of Judicial Conduct that would prevent a judge from retaining campaign contributions from one judicial election to the next. When it becomes clear that the judge will no longer seek further judicial office, the judge should disburse leftover campaign funds in any manner authorized by VAMS §130.034 except the part of VAM §130.034(5) that allows contributions to be directed to the “candidate committee” other than the judge’s own judicial election. The Commission notes that Canon 5A(2) only authorizes a judge to make contributions to “the party of choice” and not to a candidate who is not the judge. Finally, the judge should fund a pro rata share to any contributor who requests a refund after an election.
Opinion 18 is withdrawn.
(Dated: May 2, 2001)
COMMISSION ON RETIREMENT, REMOVAL AND DISCIPLINE
OPINION 178
Issue:
May a judge retain leftover campaign funds from one judicial election to the next judicial election?
Discussion:
Supreme Court Rule 2 Canon 5B(2) requires that: “A candidate shall not use or permit the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit of the candidate or members of the candidate’s family.”
VAMS § 130.034 provides methods of disposing of leftover campaign funds.
In the opinion of the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline, in the absence of a statute to the contrary, there is nothing in the Code of Judicial Conduct that would prevent a judge from retaining campaign contributions from one judicial election to the next. When it becomes clear that the judge will no longer seek further judicial office, the judge should disburse leftover campaign funds in any manner authorized by VAMS §130.034 except the part of VAM §130.034(5) that allows contributions to be directed to the “candidate committee” other than the judge’s own judicial election. The Commission notes that Canon 5A(2) only authorizes a judge to make contributions to “the party of choice” and not to a candidate who is not the judge. Finally, the judge should fund a pro rata share to any contributor who requests a refund after an election.
Opinion 18 is withdrawn.
(Dated: May 2, 2001)