Under the 1976 Maryland judicial ethics rule, could campaign contributions go to a candidate's treasurer or a voluntary committee's treasurer?

Plain-English summary

The Committee considered whether Maryland's then-cited Rule 7, which permitted reasonable contributions to a voluntary judicial campaign committee, conflicted with election statutes requiring treasurers for candidates and political committees.

It found no conflict under the 1976 provisions. Contributions supporting one judicial candidate could be paid either to that candidate's campaign treasurer or to a voluntary committee's treasurer. The Committee declined to interpret whether one person could serve in both roles or whether separate accounts and reports were required.

An editorial footnote in the official PDF states that, from January 1, 2007, candidates must appoint an authorized political committee as the campaign finance entity instead of a personal treasurer. The opinion's either-treasurer holding therefore describes the older statutory scheme.

Currency note

This opinion discusses the Maryland judicial ethics provisions in force at the time it was written. Its analysis is historical; verify the current Maryland Code of Judicial Conduct and the linked opinion before relying on a cited provision.

Common questions

Q: Where could a 1976 contribution for one judicial candidate be sent?

A: The Committee said it could go to the candidate's campaign treasurer or a voluntary campaign committee's treasurer under the statutes then discussed.

Q: Did the Committee decide whether one person could hold both treasurer roles?

A: No. It treated that and questions about separate accounts and reports as statutory interpretation outside its function.

Q: Does the official PDF identify a later change?

A: Yes. Its editorial footnote says that, starting January 1, 2007, an authorized political committee replaced the personal treasurer as the candidate's campaign finance entity.

Background and rules framework

The opinion discusses Maryland's then-cited judicial Ethics Rule 7 and Maryland Code Article 33, sections 26-3 and 26-4. It refers to ABA Canon 7B(2) as helpful guidance while saying that the ABA Code had not been adopted by the Maryland Judicial Conference.

Citations and references

• Maryland Rules of Judicial Ethics, Rule 7.
• Maryland Code (1957, 1976 Repl. Vol.) Article 33, sections 26-3 and 26-4; editorial footnote cites Election Law Article sections 13-202 and 13-207 and Chapter 510, Acts of 2006.
• ABA Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 7B(2); Thode, Reporter's Notes to Code of Judicial Conduct (1973), pages 98-99.

See also

• MD Judicial Ethics Op. 1976-05
• MD Judicial Ethics Op. 1978-07

Source

• Landing page: Maryland Judicial Ethics Committee opinion index
• Original PDF: Opinion 1976-04

Original opinion text

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

Maryland Judicial Ethics Committee

Opinion Request Number: 1976-04

Date of Issue: February 25, 1976

O Published Opinion G Unpublished Opinion G Unpublished Letter of Advice

Contributions to Judge’s Election Campaign May Be Made to Either Campaign Committee Treasurer or Judge’s Campaign Treasurer

Your letter of February 17 raises the question whether there is a possible inconsistency between Rule No. 7 of the Maryland Rules of Judicial Ethics which provides:
“A judge shall not accept gifts from lawyers, groups, or persons whose interests are, are likely to be, or have been before him in his official capacity. This rule does not prohibit reasonable financial contributions to a voluntary campaign committee in behalf of a judicial candidate, in compliance with the laws of the State of Maryland” and the provisions of Maryland Code (1957, 1976 Repl. Vol.) Art. 33, §§ 26-3 and 26-4*, which respectively require a candidate for election to public office to appoint a campaign treasurer and a political committee to appoint a chairman and treasurer who are required in each case to comply with the provisions of the Fair Election Practices Law.
This Committee has consistently taken the position that there is no inconsistency between the Rule and the statute since the Rule sanctions contributing to a voluntary campaign committee formed to support the candidacy of one or more judges, while Art. 33, § 26-3 makes the appointment of a campaign treasurer for a judge a prerequisite to the filing of his certificate of candidacy. Obviously, contributions in support of the candidacy of a single individual may be made either to his or her campaign treasurer or to the treasurer of a voluntary campaign committee.
While the American Bar Association’s Conduct [sic] of Judicial Conduct has not been adopted by the Maryland Judicial Conference, it would seem that the guidelines contained in Canon 7B(2) of that Code would prove helpful:
“A candidate, including an incumbent judge, for a judicial office that is filled by public election between competing candidates should not himself solicit or accept campaign funds, or solicit publicly stated support, but he may establish committees of responsible persons to secure and manage the expenditure of funds for his campaign and to obtain public statements of support for his candidacy. Such committees are not prohibited from soliciting campaign contributions and public support from lawyers.
A candidate’s committees may solicit funds for his campaign no earlier than [90] days before a primary election and no later than [90] days after the last election in which

• As of the editing date [July 10, 2006], Maryland Code, Election Law Article §§ 13-202 and 13-
  207, respectively. As of January 1, 2007 pursuant to Chapter 510, Acts of 2006, candidates must appoint an authorized political committee as the campaign finance entity, rather than a personal treasurer. Maryland Judicial Ethics Committee Opinion Request Number: 1976-04 Date of Issue: February 25, 1976 O Published Opinion G Unpublished Opinion G Unpublished Letter of Advice Page 2 of 2
  he participates during the election year. A candidate should not use or permit the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit of himself or members of his family.” The Commentary adds:
  “Unless the candidate is required by law to file a list of his campaign contributors, their names should not be revealed to the candidate.” See also the Note to Canon 7B(2) which appears in Thode, Reporter’s Notes to Code of Judicial Conduct (1973) at 98-99.
  We cannot pass on the questions whether the treasurer of an individual candidate can also serve as treasurer of the voluntary campaign committee contemplated by Rule 7 and whether an individual serving in both capacities would be required to maintain separate bank accounts and file separate reports, since these are questions of statutory interpretation beyond the scope of the Committee’s function.