May a justice court judge running for county court judge use the title 'Judge' on campaign materials without naming their current judgeship?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2022. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A sitting justice court judge running for county court judge used “Judge” in campaign materials without identifying his existing justice court position. The Committee found this misleading under Canon 5A(3)(d)(iii). It directed him to stop distributing such materials, correct online materials, and take down or correct signs and car magnets within ten days. The opinion allowed continued use of “Judge” if the materials clearly identified his current judgeship in a readable way.
The Committee separately found that the candidate's push card and car magnet omitted disclosures required by Mississippi Code section 23-15-1025. It directed him to cease distributing noncompliant materials and correct or remove existing signs and magnets within ten days.
The Committee also considered a complaint about the push card's statement urging voters to supply “male presence” in young people's lives. Without endorsing the statement, it concluded that the speech was protected by the First Amendment and was not subject to sanctions under the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Common questions
Q: Could the candidate use “Judge” in corrected campaign materials?
A: Yes, if the materials clearly identified his current justice court judgeship and did not mislead voters about the county court seat he sought.
Q: What disclosures were missing from the sample materials?
A: The push card did not say whether the candidate approved it, and the car magnet appeared to omit the information required by section 23-15-1025.
Q: Did the Committee sanction the statement about “male presence”?
A: No. It concluded that the statement was protected by the First Amendment and not subject to Code sanctions.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied Mississippi Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 5A(3)(d)(iii) to the candidate's judicial title, and Mississippi Code Annotated section 23-15-1025 to campaign material disclosures. It also cited section 23-15-897 and First Amendment decisions in discussing the campaign speech complaint.
Citations and references
Mississippi Code of Judicial Conduct: Canon 5A(3)(d)(iii).
Statutes: Mississippi Code Annotated §§ 23-15-1025 and 23-15-897.
Cases: Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Wilkerson, 876 So. 2d 1006 (Miss. 2004); Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765 (2002).
Other opinions cited: Special Committee Opinions 2018-26, 2006-002, 2014-001, and 2018-27.
See also
Source
- Landing page: Judicial Election Oversight Committee opinions
- Original PDF: Public Opinion No. 2022-04
- Archived official PDF: reviewable capture
Original opinion text
Full opinion text unavailable from the official source; see the linked source above for the complete text.
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2022. 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