Can a judge's spouse serve on a nonjudicial candidate's campaign committee, and can the judge sit on the dais at a political party event?

Plain-English summary

The opinion addressed a judge who asked whether the judge's spouse could serve on the election committee and appear on the campaign letterhead for a candidate for sheriff, and whether the judge could sit on the dais with the spouse during a political party social event the spouse co-chaired. The Committee worked from MCJC 7A, which bars a judge from holding party office or publicly endorsing a nonjudicial candidate but permits a judge to attend political gatherings, speak on the judge's own behalf or for other judicial candidates, and contribute to a party.

On the spouse's committee service, the Committee acknowledged that under MCJC 1, 2A, and 2C a judge must avoid impropriety and its appearance, and that occasionally a family member's conduct may be restricted to preserve the independence of the judiciary. But it concluded that a spouse serving as a campaign committee member and appearing on letterhead does not constitute the judge's public endorsement of the candidate. The judge engages in no public campaigning, passes out no literature, and gives no speeches; only the spouse's name appears, in the spouse's own capacity. The Committee reasoned a spouse should not have to hide his or her identity from an election. It therefore found the spouse is not prohibited from serving on the committee or appearing on the letterhead.

On sitting at the dais, the Committee noted MCJC 7A(2)(a) lets a judge attend a political gathering so long as the judge does not publicly endorse a nonjudicial candidate or hold party office. Drawing on prior opinions that mere attendance, contributions, buying tickets, or placing an ad-book advertisement do not amount to endorsement, while serving as an honored guest or host may, the Committee found the benefit to the sponsoring organization from the judge attending as the spouse of an organizer to be minimal. The judge is a guest like anyone else, gives no speeches, and does not organize the dinner, so the judge is not overstepping by sitting on the dais with the spouse.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992 and interprets the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct as it then stood. The MCJC has since been amended (the State Bar flags amendments effective August 1, 2013 to Canons 2, 4, 5, and 7, among other revisions), and later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a judge's spouse sit on a nonjudicial candidate's campaign committee?

A: Per the opinion, yes. The Committee concluded the spouse may serve on the committee and appear as a committee member on campaign letterhead, because that does not constitute the judge's public endorsement.

Q: Does the spouse's letterhead appearance count as the judge endorsing the candidate?

A: No. The opinion reasoned that only the spouse's name appears, in the spouse's own capacity, and the judge does no public campaigning, so there is no prohibited endorsement under MCJC 7A(1)(b).

Q: Can the judge sit on the dais at the spouse's political party event?

A: Per the opinion, yes. MCJC 7A(2)(a) permits a judge to attend political gatherings, and the Committee found the judge's presence as the spouse of an organizer, without speeches or organizing duties, does not amount to a public endorsement.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct: MCJC 7A (political activity; no public endorsement of nonjudicial candidates, but attendance at political gatherings permitted), together with MCJC 1, 2A, and 2C on the independence of the judiciary, impropriety, and prestige of office. It applies prior opinions distinguishing attendance and incidental support from prohibited endorsement.

Citations and references

Rules of Judicial Conduct:

• MCJC 1 (independence of the judiciary)
• MCJC 2A (avoid impropriety and its appearance)
• MCJC 2C (prestige of office)
• MCJC 7A (political activity)

Other opinions cited:

• JI-8, JI-11, JI-30, JI-36; CI-778; JTC Advisory Opinions 25, 32, 60, 78, 98

See also

• Mich Ethics Op. JI-104: Juror Records in Campaigns
• Mich Ethics Op. JI-44: Recusal for Personal Acquaintance

Source

• Landing page: https://www.michbar.org/opinions/ethics/numbered_opinions?OpinionID=756&Type=6

Original opinion text

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

JI-47

March 6, 1992

SYLLABUS

A judge's spouse may serve on the campaign committee of a nonjudicial candidate and appear as a committee member on campaign letterhead.

A judge may sit on the dais with the judge's spouse who is serving as co-chairperson of a political party social event.

References: MCJC 1, 2A, 2C, 7A; JI-8, JI-11, JI-30, JI-36; CI-778; JTC A/O 25, 32, 60, 78, 98.

TEXT

A judge asks whether it would be ethically appropriate for the judge's spouse to serve on the election committee and appear on the campaign letterhead for a candidate for the office of sheriff, and whether the judge may sit on the dais with the spouse during a political party social event for which the spouse serves as co-chairperson.

MCJC 7A states:

"(1) A judge or a candidate for judicial office should not:

"(a) hold any office in a political party;

"(b) make speeches on behalf of a political party or non-judicial candidate or publicly endorse a candidate for non-judicial office.

"(2) A judge or candidate for judicial office may:

"(a) attend political gatherings;

"(b) speak to such gatherings on his own behalf or on behalf of other judicial candidates;

"(c) contribute to a political party."

It is clear under MCJC 7A(1)(b) that a judge may not personally serve on the campaign committee for a political candidate. Since a judge must avoid "all impropriety and appearance of impropriety," MCJC 2A, and may not allow the prestige of the judicial office to be used for the personal or business interests of others, MCJC 2C, it is not simply the judge's conduct which must be restricted. Occasionally, conduct of members of the judge's family may be restricted in order to preserve the independence of the judiciary and confidence in the legal system, MCJC 1. See, e.g., CI-778, "[a judge] should encourage members of his family to adhere to the same standards of political conduct that apply to him"; MCR 2.003(B), where financial interest of a judge's spouse or minor child may mandate recusal of the judge. MCJC 2A is broad in its scope, and concerned with any activity that may impair a judge's perception in the public eye.

MCJC 7A(1)(b) prohibits a judge from endorsing a candidate for non-judicial office. While a sheriff's election is a nonjudicial office, a spouse serving as a campaign committee member and appearing on campaign letterhead does not constitute the judge's public endorsement of that candidate. See JI-11, where flyer of political party which lists candidates for judicial and nonjudicial office does not constitute the judge's endorsement. The judge is not engaging in any public campaigning for this particular sheriff. There are no activities such as passing out bumper stickers, handing out campaign literature, or giving speeches. See, JI-30. The name of the spouse, and not the judge, is simply appearing on stationery in his/her capacity as a committee member. This does not reflect any impropriety on the part of the judge, nor does it suggest the judge's public endorsement of a nonjudicial candidate. A spouse should not have to hide his/her identity from an election when it is proper for the judge to participate directly in the activities.

A judge's spouse is not prohibited from serving on the campaign committee of a nonjudicial candidate or appearing on the campaign committee letterhead.

With regard to sitting on the dais at a political party event, MCJC 7A(2)(a) specifically allows a judge to attend a political gathering, so long as the judge does not "publicly endorse" the nonjudicial candidate, nor hold a political office. The issue is whether the judge's presence at the front table of a political event constitutes a public endorsement in violation of MCJC 7A(1)(b).

JI-30 provides that a judge's mere attendance at a fund-raiser for a nonjudicial candidate does not constitute a public endorsement of the nonjudicial candidate. A judge's participation in other activities such as campaign contributions, JTC A/O 60, purchasing fund-raising tickets or signing nominating petitions, JTC A/O 25, are also not improper. See also, JI-36, a judge's advertisement in a political party's ad book is not ordinarily considered an endorsement. Where a judge is an honored guest, it is "likely that her person and office would be used to publicize the affair and to encourage public attendance furthering the partisan purposes of the sponsoring organization," JTC A/O 78; JTC A/O 98; JI-8. Even "hosting such an affair is not advisable so long as there is the possibility of any benefit accruing to any political organization," JTC A/O 32.

When considering the possibility of any benefit to the sponsoring political organization from the judge's attendance at a dinner as spouse of an organizer, it seems that the benefit is minimal. The judge is a guest like anyone else. The judge is not giving any speeches, nor is the judge responsible for organizing the dinner.

The judge is not overstepping boundaries by sitting on the dais with the judge's spouse at a political gathering.