Could an incumbent judge explain criminal rulings and sentences during a campaign?

Plain-English summary

The first question in a two-answer letter asked whether an incumbent judge seeking election could publicly explain criminal rulings or sentences. The Commission said judicial candidates remained bound by the Canons.

It permitted general references to court records, statistics, and procedures, including general explanations of bail, counsel appointments, sentencing recommendations, and probation statistics. Except in extraordinary circumstances, the judge should refrain from discussing specific cases in which the judge participated, especially if the comments could compromise a ruling. The letter expressly prohibited comment on pending litigation and advance announcement of rulings.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1980, after the Alabama Supreme Court’s 1975 adoption of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. Subsequent amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Canons and linked opinion before relying on its conclusions.

Common questions

Q: Could a candidate discuss general court statistics?

A: Yes. The Commission allowed general references to court records, statistics, and procedures.

Q: Could the judge discuss a pending case or announce its ruling in advance?

A: No. The Commission said Canons 3A(6) and 7B(l)(c) specifically prohibited those comments.

Background and rules framework

The letter invokes Canons 1, 2, 3A(6), and 7B, and identifies Canon 7B(l)(c) with the ban on pending-case comment and advance rulings.

Citations and references

Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:

• Canon 1
• Canon 2
• Canon 3A(6)
• Canon 7B
• Canon 7B(l)(c)

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 80-86: Campaign Statements About Litigation
• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 82-156: Campaign Literature and Pending Cases

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 80-85
• Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

80-85
80-86
Judicial Inquiry Commission
800 SOUTH MCDONOUGH STREET
SUITE 201
MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36104
July 1, 1980
The Judicial Inquiry Commission has considered your request for an opinion regarding the campaign conduct of incumbent judges running for election or re-election to judicial office. Your specific questions are summarized as follows:

1. May a judge publically explain the basis of his rulings or sentences in
   criminal cases? 80-85
2. What statements, with regard to litigation, may be made by an incumbent
   judge during the course of a political campaign? 80-86 It is the opinion of the Commission that incumbent candidates for judicial office must adhere to the Canons of Judicial Ethics in all of their campaign activities. Specifically, such candidates’ conduct must be guided by Canons 1, 2, 3A(6) and 7B. Under these Canons, it is imperative that a candidate for judicial office maintain the dignity appropriate to judicial office and promote no image other than that he will faithfully and impartially perform the duties of his office. Under Canon 3A(6) and Canon 7B(l)(c) judges are specifically prohibited from commenting on pending litigation and announcing rulings in advance. However, it is further the opinion of the Commission that during the course of his own political campaign a judge may make general references to court records, statistics and procedures. Except under the most extraordinary circumstances, a judge ,should refrain from commenting on specific cases in which he has participated, especially where such comment could compromise the validity of any ruling or order entered by him in such cases. This prohibition does not preclude a judge’s commenting on his duty to set a reasonable bail and appoint counsel in criminal cases or the fact that he shares the responsibility for appointing counsel with four other judges and thus makes only about one-fourth such appointments. A judge may also explain generally that sentences on guilty pleas, in the vast majority of cases, were upon the recommendation of the State, the officer, the victim or were dictated by law, and that the disposal of cases in this manner constitutes a useful tool for law enforcement and saves the taxpayers money. A judge may also comment on the probation statistics of his court and explain generally the useful effects of probation. If you have any further specific questions, please feel free to address such questions to the Commission.