South Dakota Special Committee on Judicial Election Campaign Intervention Ethics Opinions
Free plain-English summaries of legal ethics opinions issued by the South Dakota Special Committee on Judicial Election Campaign Intervention, with full citations and source links on every page.
No South Dakota Special Committee on Judicial Election Campaign Intervention opinions match these filters
Try a different search term or clear the filters.
Is a South Dakota judicial candidate automatically responsible for a family member’s campaign conduct?
No. The Committee said the candidate must encourage family members to follow the candidate’s political-conduct standards, but is not strictly responsible for their independent acts; coordinated…
May a South Dakota judicial candidate review public campaign reports identifying contributors?
The Committee said a candidate must take reasonable measures to avoid learning contributor identities, including information in public filings, while the campaign committee handles required reporting.
Did South Dakota's judicial campaign contribution limit apply to organizations as well as individuals?
Yes. The Committee said the $1,000 election-year cap in Canon 5(C)(2) applied to contributions from both individuals and organizations.
May a South Dakota judicial candidate advertise at a movie theater?
Yes. The Committee said movie theater advertising is permissible if its placement and content preserve the dignity and integrity of judicial office; it cautioned that some theaters or films could…
May an unopposed incumbent South Dakota judge contribute campaign funds to another judicial candidate?
Yes. The Committee read Canon 5C to allow judges subject to public election to contribute to a candidate at any time, including when the incumbent has no opponent.
Can a South Dakota judicial campaign hold a fundraising athletic event with the candidate present?
The committee could organize a donation-funded event, but the candidate could not attend if that would reveal contributors. The opinion also addressed shirts, a separate committee donation page, and…
Must an unopposed incumbent South Dakota judge file a campaign finance disclosure report?
The Committee said no report was required for the unopposed incumbent under the cited 2014 statutes, although it said filing would be advisable if the incumbent received campaign funds.
Could a South Dakota judicial candidate’s family member or the candidate contribute more than $1,000 to the campaign?
The Committee said the $1,000 per-individual limit applied to family members, but the candidate could contribute more than $1,000 of personal funds to the candidate’s own campaign.
Could a sitting South Dakota legislator campaign for judicial office while remaining in the legislature?
Yes. The Committee said the constitutional bar on serving simultaneously as judge and legislator did not prevent a legislator from running for judicial office, but a successful candidate could not…
Did the South Dakota judicial candidate’s political-party appearances violate the Code?
The Committee found no Code violation on the alleged facts, which included appearances at party events and availability of campaign materials. It distinguished the statute restricting…
Could an attorney write a newspaper letter endorsing a South Dakota judicial candidate without the campaign-ad disclaimer?
The Committee said an attorney’s letter to the editor supporting a judicial candidate was permitted and did not require the disclaimer for printed campaign literature or paid print ads under the…
Could an appointed incumbent South Dakota circuit judge ask voters to “retain” the judge in a campaign ad?
Yes. The Committee said “retain” accurately conveyed the incumbent circuit judge’s request to continue in office, while “reelect” could mislead because the judge had been appointed rather than elected.
Did a disclaimer-free flyer distributed before a South Dakota judicial candidate filed a petition violate the Code when the candidate did not authorize or pay for it?
No. The Committee dismissed the complaint because the flyer preceded the candidate's filing and, according to the candidate's response, was neither authorized nor paid for by that candidate.
Did the South Dakota Code of Judicial Conduct require judicial candidates to follow the campaign-ad disclaimer provision in SDCL 12-25-4.1?
Yes. The Committee said Canon 5C(2) incorporated the statutory disclaimer requirement into the judicial conduct code, despite a separate legislative exemption for judicial candidates.
Could a South Dakota circuit judge in an uncontested election endorse another circuit court candidate?
Yes. The Committee concluded that the incumbent remained a judge subject to public election despite having no opponent and could endorse circuit court candidates.
Could a South Dakota judicial candidate answer an issue questionnaire, and what did the 2006 Code require?
The Committee allowed a candidate to answer, subject to the Code’s limits on impartiality pledges and misrepresentation; it also identified recusal and a ten-day filing requirement for responses.
Could a South Dakota circuit court candidate use an ad naming the office and say the campaign accepted no contributions?
The Committee accepted the proposed ad but suggested adding “for” before “Circuit Court Judge” to clarify the candidate was not an incumbent; the no-contributions claim was acceptable only if true.
Could a South Dakota magistrate judge wear a judicial robe in campaign material for a circuit court seat?
Yes, if the material clearly identified the candidate as a magistrate judge rather than an incumbent circuit judge.
Could a South Dakota judge endorse another judicial candidate and invite voters to ask lawyers or court staff about the candidate?
The Committee recognized endorsements allowed by Canon 5C(1)(b)(iii) and accepted references to lawyers and law enforcement, but recommended against inviting voters to ask court staff.
Could a South Dakota judge appear in a robe, and could a judicial candidate appear in a courtroom, in 2006 campaign material?
Yes to both. After repeal of an earlier categorical ban, the Committee allowed the images while cautioning that campaign materials must not be false, deceptive or misleading.
Browse South Dakota Special Committee on Judicial Election Campaign Intervention opinions by topic
Legal ethics opinions from the South Dakota Special Committee on Judicial Election Campaign Intervention interpret the rules of professional conduct for working lawyers, in response to inquiries from members and committees. They are advisory, not binding like court discipline decisions, but courts and discipline boards treat formal opinions as substantial guidance on how the rules apply. Every opinion above has a plain-English question and short answer, plus a link to the original source on the bar's site.