––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
- Posted January 02, 2015
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
ABA urges court to uphold states' right to ban judicial solicitations
Last week the American Bar Association filed an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court asking that a Florida rule of judicial conduct that prohibits candidates for judicial office from personally soliciting campaign funds be upheld as constitutional.
The brief was filed in the case Lanell Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar which is set for argument on Jan. 20, 2015. The Florida Supreme Court previously concluded that the Florida rule, Canon 7C(1), was constitutional under a standard of scrutiny that balanced free speech issues with Florida's right to ensure the integrity of its judicial branch.
The ABA brief notes that the Florida rule is almost identical to the ABA's 1972 version of Model Canon 7B(2) and the ABA's current version, Canon 4.1A(8). Similar language has been adopted by 29 other states. These personal solicitation bans are constitutional, the ABA brief argues, because they place no limits on the judicial candidates' ability to communicate their views or qualifications for office, or to form campaign committees to solicit funds to support their election efforts.
The prohibition on personal solicitation, the ABA brief points out, "does not prohibit candidates from soliciting other forms of support, like asking for votes or putting up yard signs." Instead, the bans are narrowly tailored to address the potential for corruption and for the appearance of corruption of state judges by removing the judicial candidates from the potential for offering, or for being perceived by the public as offering, a promise in return for a campaign contribution, the brief states.
The Florida rule "does not bar a judicial candidate from sending mass mailings under his signature, or from giving campaign speeches to a crowd or intimate group; it only bars that mailing or speech from including a personal request for a campaign contribution," the ABA brief notes.
The ABA's amicus brief is available onlince at http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/images/abanews/amicus_williams-yulee.pdf. It also has an appendix with a state-by-state breakdown on the judicial selection process and relevant judicial rules.
Published: Fri, Jan 02, 2015
headlines Oakland County
- Attorneys sharpen courtroom skills at inaugural program
- Michigan tax preparers indicted for conspiring to defraud the United States and preparing false tax returns
- Woman pleads no contest on multiple cases, including embezzlement of $90K from her father
- As the country turns 250, retired judges hit the road to defend judicial independence
- Private mobile home water services provider, president sentenced for falsifying water safety, discharge tests
headlines National
- ABA connects death row inmate to pro bono attorneys who help free him
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- 2 judges suspended in separate cases after being indicted on criminal charges
- Convicted ex-judge gets $5K fine but no prison time in immigration case
- Ohio governor signs bill prohibiting foreign litigation funding
- Many small firms collect payments faster than BigLaw counterparts, new data shows




