Ezel / Ethics Opinions / JUDICIAL-IL

Could an Illinois judge running for higher office publish a newspaper essay favoring gun control?

Short answer Yes, on the stated facts. The Committee said the general gun-control essay, which affirmed impartiality, did not commit the judge on likely cases under the amended former Rule 67.
Bar
JUDICIAL-IL
Issued
March 22, 1994

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1994. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

A sitting judge running for higher judicial office proposed a newspaper essay advocating stricter gun-control measures. The draft also affirmed the judge’s commitment to decide future cases impartially.

The Committee treated gun control as a general law-related issue under former Rule 64A. It said that expressing a view on the general issue did not, by itself, compromise impartiality in specific cases involving firearms.

For a candidate, the Committee applied former Rule 67A(3)(d)(i)’s ban on statements that commit or appear to commit the candidate on likely cases, controversies, or issues. It concluded the proposed general essay did not cross that line and discussed the Seventh Circuit’s decision in Buckley.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1994 under the 1993 Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct. The Committee’s archive says that Code was superseded on January 1, 2023, and does not assess the effect of the 2023 Code. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Code before relying on its analysis.

Common questions

Q: Could the sitting judge publish the essay?

A: Yes. The Committee found the proposed general essay compatible with the former Code.

Q: Did candidacy change the answer?

A: No. The Committee found no commitment on likely cases under amended Rule 67.

Q: What role did the impartiality statement play?

A: The Committee said it helped avoid undermining public confidence in judicial impartiality.

Background and rules framework

The opinion considered former Rules 62, 63A(6), 64A, and 67A(3)(d)(i), including the 1993 change to candidate-speech restrictions following Buckley v. Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board.

Citations and references

  • Illinois Supreme Court Rules 62, 63A(6), 64A, and 67A(3)(d)(i).
  • Buckley v. Illinois Judicial Inquiry Board, 997 F.2d 224 (7th Cir. 1993).

See also

Source

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1994. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace