Could a judge use the judicial title in a newspaper letter praising a legislator?

Plain-English summary

A district judge proposed a letter to the editor, signed with the judicial title, praising a local legislator's work on a bill. The letter would accompany a large advertisement by an organization that had lobbied for the legislation. The judge's proposed letter praised the legislator's effectiveness.

The Commission rejected that specific letter. It said the text could readily be understood as a public endorsement of the legislator and used in later campaigns. The judicial title heightened concerns about lending office prestige to another's interests and about inappropriate political activity.

The opinion considered Canons 1, 2C, 4A, and 7. It did not announce a general ban on judges writing about legislation; its conclusion concerned the submitted letter and its setting.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1999, 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 the judge send the proposed letter to the editor?

A: No. The Commission said the letter could be construed as endorsing the legislator.

Q: Why did the judicial title matter?

A: The proposed signature identified the judge's official office, raising the concern that office prestige would advance another person's interests.

Background and rules framework

Alabama Canon 1 addressed judicial independence, Canon 2C barred lending office prestige to private interests, Canon 4A allowed legal-system speech within limits, and Canon 7 restricted political activity inappropriate to judicial office.

Citations and references

The opinion cites Alabama Canons 1, 2C, 4A, and 7 and Advisory Opinions 78-39, 80-95, 82-142, 84-209, and 99-732.

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 84-209: Senate Campaign Advisory Committee

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 80-95: Partisan Ticket Endorsement

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions

• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 99-737

• Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics

Original opinion text

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

JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION
DATE ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 10, 1999 ADVISORY OPINION 99-737
WRITING A LETTER TO A NEWSPAPER
COMMENDING A LEGISLATOR
ISSUE
May a judge write a certain letter to local
newspapers praising a member of the state
legislature from that locality? Answer: No.
FACTS
A district judge proposes to send a certain letter to
local newspapers, in the form of a letter to the
editor, signed with the judge’s title of office. The
proposed letter praises the actions of a particular
legislator in connection with legislation sponsored
by that legislator, and would be submitted in
conjunction with a large advertisement taken out
by the board of an organization that lobbied for this
legislation. The letter indicates that the legislator’s
effortswere superiortothose ofother legislatorsin
general, and it also states that the legislator is in a
position to effectively represent his constituency.
DISCUSSION
It is the opinion of the Commission that the judge
may not send the letter to the editor he proposes.
This conclusion is based on consideration of
provisions in Canons 1, 2C, 4A, and 7 of the
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics.
In pertinent part, Canon 1 requires judges to
uphold the independence of the judiciary. Canon
2C contains a provision that a judge “should not
lend the prestige of his office to advance the private
interests of others.” Canon 4A allows a judge to
“speak, write, lecture, teach, and participate in
other activities concerning the law, the legal
system, and the administration of justice” under
certain conditions. Canon 7 requires a judge to
“refrain from political activity inappropriate to
judicial office.”
In addressing participation by a judge in lobbying
forlegislationrecently,theCommission noted that
“[w]henever a group engagesin advocacyregarding
substantive legal issues, participation by a judge
shouldbecarefully scrutinized.” AdvisoryOpinion
99-732.
It appears to the Commission that the letter
submitted toitforreview could easily be construed
as a public endorsement of the legislator in
question, and might be used as such in future
campaigns by that legislator. The Commission
notes that it concluded under the original Canon 7
that public endorsements of nonjudicial candidates
areundesirableandstronglydiscouraged,especially
when the judge’s judicial title would be used to
identify his official position. Advisory Opinions
78-39, 80-95, and 82-142. See also, Advisory
Opinion 84-209 (a judge must not lend the
prestige of his office to advance the campaign [of a
candidate for nonjudicial office]).
REFERENCES
AlabamaAdvisoryOpinions78-39,80-95,82-142,
84-209, and 99-732.
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, Canons 1, 2C,
4A, and 7 .
This opinion is advisory only and is based on the
specific facts and questions submitted by the judge
who requested the opinion pursuant to Rule 17 of
the Rules of Procedure of the Judicial Inquiry
Commission. For further information, you may
contact the Judicial Inquiry Commission, 800
South McDonough Street, Suite 201,
Montgomery, Alabama 36104; tel.: (334) 242-
4089; fax: (334) 240-3327; e-mail:
[email protected].