Can a judicial candidate use campaign funds to sponsor a youth sports team in Michigan?

Plain-English summary

A judicial candidate asked whether campaign funds could be spent to sponsor a youth soccer team whose sponsor name appears on the team's schedules and uniforms. The Committee first concluded that team sponsorship falls within the statutory definition of a campaign expenditure, because it transfers money to influence the candidate's nomination or election (MCLA 169.206).

The Committee then read MCJC 5A, which lets a judge or candidate engage in sports and recreational activities so long as they do not detract from the dignity of the office or interfere with judicial duties, and saw no reason that sponsoring youth soccer would do either. It applied MCJC 7B(1)(c) to the content of the sponsorship: the campaign communication on the uniform must carry the name and address of the sponsor, may not be false, fraudulent, deceptive, or misleading or create a false impression through size, color, or type style, must clearly indicate it is a campaign advertisement, and may not misrepresent the candidate's identity, background, or other facts, including any false impression of incumbency for a candidate who is not currently a judge.

Finally, the Committee addressed that the uniforms and promotional items would continue in use beyond the campaign period. It concluded that if the slogans and items were proper when the funds were expended, that is, they did not detract from the dignity of the office, did not interfere with judicial duties, and were not misleading or pledges of conduct in office, they may continue to be used by the team after the campaign is over.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992 under the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct as it then stood, and refers to the Michigan campaign-finance statute as it then existed. The rules and statute have since been amended, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Could a judicial candidate pay to sponsor a youth sports team with campaign money?

A: Yes. The opinion concluded that sponsorship is a campaign expenditure and is permissible under MCJC 5A, provided the displayed information meets the content limits of MCJC 7B(1)(c).

Q: What did the sponsorship message on the uniform have to include or avoid?

A: Per the opinion, it had to carry the sponsor's name and address, clearly indicate it was a campaign advertisement, and avoid any false, misleading, or deceptive content, including a false impression of incumbency for a non-incumbent candidate.

Q: Could the team keep using the uniforms after the campaign ended?

A: Yes. The opinion concluded that if the items were proper when the funds were spent, they may continue to be used by the team after the campaign period.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interpreted MCJC 5A of the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct (avocational activities) and MCJC 7B(1)(c) (campaign advertising content and misrepresentation), read together with the Michigan campaign-finance statute defining a campaign expenditure (MCLA 169.206).

Citations and references

Code of Judicial Conduct:

• MCJC 5A (sports, recreational, and other avocational activities)
• MCJC 7B(1)(c) (campaign advertising; no misrepresentation; identifying information)

Statutes:

• MCLA 169.206; MSA 4.1703(6) (definition of a campaign expenditure)

See also

• Mich Ethics Op. JI-36: Judge's Ad in a Party Ad Book
• Mich Ethics Op. JI-11: Judge's Name on Party Ticket
• Mich Ethics Op. JI-131: Judicial Campaign Speech

Source

• Landing page: https://www.michbar.org/opinions/ethics/numbered_opinions?OpinionID=767&Type=6

Original opinion text

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

JI-58

October 15, 1992

SYLLABUS

A judicial candidate may spend campaign funds on sponsorship of a youth sports team so long as the information displayed on the schedule and uniforms of the team do not misrepresent the candidate's identity, qualifications, or present position and includes the necessary identifying information.

References: MCJC 5A, 7B(1)(c); MCLA 169.206, MSA 4.1703(6).

TEXT

A judicial candidate has inquired whether it is appropriate to expend campaign funds to sponsor a youth soccer team which has a season split into two halves - one in the fall and one in the spring. Team sponsors include individuals, professional corporations and businesses and the name of the team sponsor appears on all schedules and on the uniforms (t-shirts) worn by the team members.

Team sponsorship falls within the definition of a campaign expenditure as it includes a transfer of money for the purpose of influencing the nomination or election of the candidate. MCLA 169.206; MSA 4.1703(6).

Further, a judge or judicial candidate may engage in the arts, sports and other social and recreational activities so long as the activities do not detract from the dignity of the office or interfere with the performance of the judge's judicial duties. MCJC 5A. The Committee does not see any reason why a judge's participation in the sponsorship of youth soccer would detract from the dignity of the office or interfere with judicial duties.

Campaign communications must include the name and address of the person or group sponsor paying for the communication. The advertisement (name on uniform) may not be false, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading or create a false impression through emphasis of size, color or type style. It must also clearly indicate that it is a campaign advertisement and may not misrepresent the identity, background or any other fact including the possible impression of incumbency for a judicial candidate who is not currently a judge. MCJC 7B(1)(c).

In the present instance, the uniforms and other promotional items for the team would continue to be used throughout the playing season, and beyond the campaign period. If the slogans used and promotional items purchased by the judicial campaign are proper when expended, i.e., do not detract from the dignity of the office or performance of judicial duties, and are not misleading or constitute pledges of conduct in office, they may continue to be used by the team after the campaign period is over.