Ezel / Ethics Opinions / JUDICIAL-SD

Can a South Dakota judicial campaign hold a fundraising athletic event with the candidate present?

Short answer 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 meet-and-greet events under the same donor-identity restriction.
Bar
JUDICIAL-SD
Issued
May 28, 2014
Source
View Original PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2014. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 2014
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
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 Not binding precedent.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 as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

The Committee answered five campaign questions. It allowed a campaign committee to organize an athletic event funded by participant donations, but said the judicial candidate could not attend if attendance would reveal who contributed.

It allowed campaign shirts only when they were not exchanged for donations or distributed in a way that identified event donors to the candidate. For online contributions, it favored directing users to a separate committee-controlled page instead of soliciting funds on the candidate’s own page.

A meet-and-greet with committee members accepting donations required extreme caution so the candidate would not learn who donated or refused to donate. Throughout, the opinion applied Canon 5’s separation of candidate and contributor identities.

In practice

The opinion permitted committee fundraising activity while keeping the candidate from learning donor identities. It treated candidate attendance, merchandise distribution and web design as ways those identities might be revealed.

Common questions

Q: May the campaign committee hold a donation-funded athletic event?

A: Yes. The Committee said its fundraising role permitted the event.

Q: May the candidate take part in that event?

A: No. The Committee said attendance would reveal contributors’ identities to the candidate.

Q: Could the campaign offer shirts?

A: Yes, if they were not exchanged for donations or distributed in a way that identified donors to the candidate.

Q: Could online donations be offered?

A: The Committee said contributors should be directed to a separate page where the campaign committee solicited funds, without the candidate personally inviting contributions.

Background and rules framework

The Committee applied South Dakota Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 5B(2) commentary on campaign committees and Canons 5C(1)(b) and 5C(2)(b)(v) on campaign materials and confidentiality of contributor identities.

Citations and references

  • South Dakota Code of Judicial Conduct Canons 5B(2), 5C(1)(b), and 5C(2)(b)(v).

See also

Source

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 2014. 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