Could a South Dakota judicial candidate answer an issue questionnaire, and what did the 2006 Code require?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2006. 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 judicial candidate asked whether a written questionnaire could be answered. The Committee said the candidate could choose to respond, but discussed the Code's limits on pledges or commitments inconsistent with impartial judging and on knowingly misrepresenting facts.
The opinion quoted commentary explaining that answers on disputed issues might require recusal if they amounted to commitments to decide other than impartially. It also cited Canon 3E(3), which required filing a copy of a questionnaire response with the Clerk of the Supreme Court within ten days of submitting it.
Currency note
This 2006 opinion applied South Dakota's then-current Code of Judicial Conduct and, where cited, election statutes. Later changes may affect its analysis; verify the current sources before relying on it.
In practice
Under the Code the opinion interpreted, candidates could answer questionnaires, with their answers subject to the stated restrictions and filing requirement.
Common questions
Q: Were candidate questionnaire responses prohibited?
A: No. The Committee said candidates could answer if they chose.
Q: What if an answer committed the candidate to decide a case other than impartially?
A: The cited commentary called for recusal from cases affected by that commitment if the candidate was elected.
Q: Did the Code require filing the response?
A: Yes. The opinion stated that Canon 3E(3) required a copy with the Supreme Court Clerk within ten days of submission.
Background and rules framework
The Committee applied former Canons 5A(3)(d)(i) and (ii) and their commentary, plus commentary to Canon 3E(1)(e) and Canon 3E(3). It cited North Dakota Family Alliance v. Bader concerning candidates’ responses.
Citations and references
- South Dakota Code of Judicial Conduct Canons 5A(3)(d)(i)-(ii), 3E(1)(e), 3E(3).
- North Dakota Family Alliance v. Bader, 361 F. Supp. 2d 1021 (D.N.D. 2005).
See also
Source
- Landing page: Judicial Elections Committee
- Original PDF: 2006 prior-opinions compilation, Opinion 06-05
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2006. 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