Can a magistrate campaign for the judge who appointed them, or solicit campaign funds for that judge's re-election?

Currency note

The Board withdrew this opinion on August 3, 2018 in Advisory Opinion 2018-04; it is retained here for research only and is not current guidance. The opinion was issued in 2002 under the former Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, which the Board flagged as superseded by the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct effective March 1, 2009. The Canon 7 campaign-conduct provisions discussed here have been renumbered and revised in the current Code. Treat this page as historical context. Verify against the current Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct and the superseding opinion before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Plain-English summary

The Board considered what a magistrate may do for the re-election campaign of the judge who appointed the magistrate. Starting from the premise that magistrates, like judges, must comply with Canon 7 of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, the Board concluded that Canon 7(B)(2)(b) bars a magistrate from campaign activities such as going door to door to talk with voters, distributing campaign literature, placing yard signs, or working a telephone bank for the appointing judge. The Board held that the same provision bars a magistrate from soliciting or receiving campaign funds for that judge, because all of these activities are prohibited public endorsements.

The Board read the prohibition broadly: Canon 7(B)(2)(b) bars a magistrate from publicly endorsing or opposing any candidate for public office, including an incumbent judge, a judicial candidate, or any other candidate. The Board added a caution directed at judicial candidates: under Canon 7(C)(1), a candidate may not involve public employees subject to the candidate's direction or control in soliciting and receiving campaign contributions. The Board noted one thing a magistrate may do: like a judge, a magistrate may use personal funds to make a campaign contribution to a candidate for judicial or public office.

Common questions

Q: Can a magistrate put up yard signs or canvass for the judge who appointed them?

A: No, under this opinion. It concluded that Canon 7(B)(2)(b) bars campaign activities such as canvassing, distributing literature, yard signs, and phone banks for the appointing judge, as prohibited public endorsements. The Board withdrew the opinion in 2018.

Q: Can a magistrate help raise campaign money for the appointing judge?

A: No. The opinion concluded that soliciting or receiving campaign funds for the appointing judge is improper under Canon 7(B)(2)(b), and it cautioned candidates under Canon 7(C)(1) against involving employees under their control in fundraising.

Q: Can a magistrate personally donate to a judicial candidate?

A: Yes. Per the opinion, a magistrate, like a judge, may use personal funds to make a campaign contribution to a candidate for judicial or public office.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Canon 7 of the former Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct: Canon 7(B)(2)(b) (a judge or judicial officer shall not publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office) and Canon 7(C)(1) (limits on involving employees in campaign fundraising). The Board applied these to magistrates on the principle that magistrates must comply with the Code as judges do. The campaign-conduct rules now appear, renumbered and revised, in the current Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct. The Board withdrew the opinion in Adv. Op. 2018-04.

Citations and references

Rules of Judicial Conduct:

• Former Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 7(B)(2)(b), Canon 7(C)(1)

See also

• Ohio BPC Op. 1988-017: Judicial Campaign Political Contributions
• Ohio BPC Op. 1992-016: Referee Using Title in Judicial Campaign Advertising
• Ohio BPC Op. 1987-037: Judicial Campaign Fund-Raising Window

Source

• Landing page: https://ohioadvop.org/advisory-opinion-index/
• Original PDF: https://www.ohioadvop.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Op-02-013.pdf

Original opinion text

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

The Supreme Court of Ohio
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE 41 SOUTH HIGH STREET-SUITE 2320, COLUMBUS, OH 43215-6104 (614) 644-5800 (888) 664-8345 FAX: (614) 644-5804 www.sconet.state.oh.us

OFFICE OF SECRETARY
OPINION 2002-13
Issued October 4, 2002
Withdrawn by Adv. Op. 2018-04
[Former CJC Opinion-provides advice under the former Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct which is superseded by the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, eff. 3/1/2009.]

SYLLABUS: Magistrates, like judges, must comply with Canon 7 of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct. It is improper under Canon 7(B)(2)(b) for a magistrate to engage in campaign activities, such as going door to door to talk with people, going door to door to distribute campaign literature, placing yard signs, or participating in a telephone bank, on behalf of the appointing judge who is seeking re-election. Also, it is improper under Canon 7(B)(2)(b) for a magistrate to solicit or receive campaign funds on behalf of the appointing judge who is seeking re-election. Such activities constitute prohibited public endorsements under Canon 7(B)(2)(b). Further, it is improper under Canon 7(B)(2)(b) for a magistrate to publicly endorse or oppose any candidate for public office, this includes endorsements or opposition of an incumbent judge, a judicial candidate, or any other candidate for public office. Judicial candidates should be aware that under Canon 7(C)(1) they are not permitted to involve public employees, subject to their direction or control, in the solicitation and receipt of campaign fund contributions. Magistrates, like judges, may properly use his or her personal funds to make a campaign contribution to a candidate for judicial or public office.

OPINION: This opinion addresses campaign activities by magistrates on behalf of judicial candidates.

Is it proper for a magistrate to engage in campaign activities, such as going door to door to talk with people, going door to door to distribute campaign literature, placing yard signs, or participating in a telephone bank, on behalf of the appointing judge who is seeking re-election?

Magistrates of a probate court would like to assist in the judicial campaign of their appointing judge who is seeking re-election to the probate court. The magistrates inquire whether they may engage in campaign activities such as going door to door to talk with people, going door to door to distribute campaign literature, placing yard signs, and participating in a telephone bank.

Magistrates, like judges, must abide by the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct. The Compliance Section of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct states “[a]nyone, whether or not a lawyer, who is an officer of a judicial system performing judicial functions, including an officer such as a referee in bankruptcy, special master, court commissioner,

Op. 2002-13
2

or magistrate, is a judge for the purpose of this Code.” There are exceptions listed in the Compliance Section, but none of the exceptions release magistrates from compliance with Canon 7 of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct.

Canon 7 of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct governs political activity of judges and judicial candidates. By operation of the Compliance Section of the Code, Canon 7 governs political activity of magistrates as well. Magistrates, like judges, are prohibited under Canon 7(B)(2)(b) from publicly endorsing or opposing a candidate for another public office.

Canon 7(B)(2) A judge [magistrate] or judicial candidate shall not do any of the following: (b) Make speeches on behalf of a political organization or another candidate at a political meeting or publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for another public office.

Canon 7 does not define “publicly endorse.” A dictionary definition of endorse is “to give approval of or support to: SANCTION .” Webster’s II New Riverside University Dictionary 431 (1984).

Ohio judicial campaign grievance case law provides an example of a public endorsement under Canon 7(B)(2)(b). The placement of judicial candidates’ names on an invitation to another candidate’s fund raiser constitutes a public endorsement. In re Jud Campaign Complaint Against Keys (1996), 80 Ohio Misc. 2d 1, 2.

There have been no advisory opinions of the Board addressing what activities constitute a “public endorsement” of a candidate under Canon 7(B)(2)(b). With this opinion the Board advises that the following campaign activities by a magistrate or judge constitute public endorsements under Canon 7(B)(2)(b). Going door to door to distribute campaign literature on behalf of a candidate constitutes a public endorsement. Going door to door to talk with people on behalf of a candidate constitutes a public endorsement. Participating in a telephone bank on behalf of a candidate constitutes a public endorsement. Placing yard signs for a candidate constitutes a public endorsement. Soliciting or receiving campaign funds for a candidate constitutes a public endorsement. These activities show public approval and support and are considered public endorsements of a candidate. [This is not intended to be an exhaustive list of activities that constitute public endorsements under Canon 7(B)(2)(b).]

Thus, a magistrate should not engage in the proposed campaign activities of going door to door to distribute campaign literature, going door to door to talk with people, participating in a phone bank, or placing yard signs on behalf of the appointing judge who is seeking re-election. Nor, should a magistrate engage in soliciting or receiving campaign funds. [With regard to yard signs, a judge or magistrate does not violate Canon 7(B)(2)(b) by his or her spouse placing a yard sign, supporting the spouse’s candidacy, in real estate jointly owned by them. See Ohio SupCt., Bd of Comm’rs on Griev & Disc, Op. 2001-1 advising that “[w]hen a judge’s spouse is a candidate for elected public or

Op. 2002-13
3

judicial office, the judge may allow campaign signs promoting the spouse’s candidacy to be placed on real estate jointly owned by the judge and spouse.”]

The prohibitory language in Canon 7(B)(2)(b) applies not only to public endorsement or opposition of judicial candidates but public endorsement or opposition of any candidate for public office. Therefore, a magistrate should not publicly endorse or oppose an incumbent judge, judicial candidate, or any other candidate for another public office.

Judicial candidates should be aware that under Canon 7(C)(1) they are not permitted to involve public employees, subject to their direction or control, in the solicitation and receipt of campaign fund contributions.

Canon 7(C)(1) A judicial candidate shall prohibit public employees subject to his or her direction or control [such as magistrates] from soliciting or receiving campaign fund contributions.

Under Canon 7(C)(1), activities that involve a magistrate in soliciting or receiving funds for his or her appointing judge are improper.

Magistrates, like judges, may properly use his or her personal funds to make a campaign contribution to a candidate for judicial or public office. Canon 7(C)(7)(b) of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct restricts a judge from contributing or expending campaign funds in support of or opposition to a candidate for a public office, but contains no language prohibiting a judge from contributing personal funds in support of or opposition to a candidate for public office. A campaign contribution from personal funds does not constitute a public endorsement.

In conclusion, this Board advises the following. Magistrates, like judges, must comply with Canon 7 of the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct. It is improper under Canon 7(B)(2)(b) for a magistrate to engage in campaign activities, such as going door to door to talk with people, going door to door to distribute campaign literature, placing yard signs, or participating in a telephone bank, on behalf of the appointing judge who is seeking re- election. Also, it is improper under Canon 7(B)(2)(b) for a magistrate to solicit or receive campaign funds on behalf of the appointing judge who is seeking re-election. Such activities constitute prohibited public endorsements under Canon 7(B)(2)(b). Further, it is improper under Canon 7(B)(2)(b) for a magistrate to publicly endorse or oppose any candidate for public office, this includes endorsements or opposition of an incumbent judge, a judicial candidate, or any other candidate for public office. Judicial candidates should be aware that under Canon 7(C)(1) they are not permitted to involve public employees, subject to their direction or control, in the solicitation and receipt of campaign fund contributions. Magistrates, like judges, may properly use his or her personal funds to make a campaign contribution to a candidate for judicial or public office.

Advisory Opinions of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline are informal, nonbinding opinions in response to prospective or hypothetical questions

Op. 2002-13
4

regarding the application of the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio, the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Judiciary, the Code of Professional Responsibility, the Code of Judicial Conduct, and the Attorney’s Oath of Office.