Can a lawyer running for elective office advertise the campaign, including the offices and memberships he holds, without violating the lawyer-advertising rules?

Plain-English summary

The Council of Senior Citizens, a nonprofit organization governed by a Board of Trustees, published a monthly newspaper for its members. One Trustee was a lawyer and a Judge running for reelection against an opponent. The questions were whether the Judge could advertise his candidacy in the Council's paper, whether his opponent could do the same, and whether the Judge could state in his ad that he was a member of the Council's Board of Trustees.

The Committee held that although Canon 24 bars advertising or solicitation of professional employment by an attorney, it is well settled that political advertising by a lawyer who is a candidate for public office does not violate Canon 24 so long as the advertising is conducted in a dignified manner and is not designed as a means of seeking professional employment (citing Drinker, Legal Ethics, page 248; Texas Opinions 103 and 210; ABA Opinion 74; and several ABA Informal Decisions). Both the incumbent Judge and his opponent could therefore ethically advertise their candidacy in the Council's newspaper. That ruling was 8-0.

On whether the Judge could state his Board membership in the ad, one member viewed it as improper self-laudation. The majority disagreed: Canon 24 prohibits self-laudation only as an indirect solicitation of professional employment, and because the apparent purpose here was to solicit votes rather than legal business, including the Trustee fact would not violate Canon 24. That ruling was 7-1. The Committee expressly limited the opinion to the Canons governing attorneys and expressed no opinion on any question of judicial ethics.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1968, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. It also predates Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), which loosened categorical advertising restrictions, though prohibitions on misleading communications were not eliminated. Subsequent rule amendments or 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 lawyer who is running for office buy campaign advertising?

A: The Committee said yes. Political advertising by a lawyer running for public office does not violate Canon 24 so long as it is dignified and not designed to seek professional employment, and it may appear in publications of either general or limited distribution.

Q: Can the lawyer's election opponent also advertise?

A: Yes. The Committee held both the incumbent lawyer-judge and his opponent could ethically advertise their candidacy in the organization's newspaper.

Q: Can the lawyer list the offices or memberships he holds in the campaign ad?

A: The majority (7-1) said yes here, because Canon 24 bars self-laudation only as indirect solicitation of professional employment, and the apparent purpose was to solicit votes rather than legal business.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24 (advertising, solicitation, and self-laudation by attorneys). The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.2 (advertising). The Committee expressly did not reach judicial-ethics questions.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
• MR 7.2 (advertising), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 24 (former canon)

Other opinions cited:

• Texas Opinions 103 (September 1954) and 210 (December 1960)
• ABA Opinion 74 (August 1932); ABA Informal Decisions 529, 656, 707, and 795

Other references:

• Drinker, Legal Ethics, page 248

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 346: An Association Advertising a Lawyer to Its Members
• TX Ethics Op. 344: Use of the Titles "Doctor" and "J.D." by a Lawyer
• TX Ethics Op. 338: Lawyer Listings in Telephone Yellow Pages

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-340/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_340.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

The Council of Senior Citizens, a nonprofit corporate organization, is governed by a Board of Trustees and publishes a monthly newspaper to inform its members of matters of special interest to them. One of the Trustees is an attorney and a Judge. He is running for reelection and has an opponent.
Is it ethical for the Judge to advertise his candidacy in the Council's paper?
Is it ethical for his opponent to so advertise?
Is it ethical for the Judge to include in his advertisement in the Council paper the fact that he is a member of the Council's Board of Trustees?

23 Baylor L. Rev. 875 (1972)

SOLICITATION - ADVERTISEMENT BY POLITICAL CANDIDATE
An attorney seeking an elective public office may ethically advertise his political candidacy in publications of either general or limited distribution.

Canon 24.

While Canon 24 prohibits any type of advertisement or solicitation of professional employment by an attorney, it is well settled that political advertising by an attorney who is a candidate for public office does not violate Canon 24 so long as the advertising is conducted in a dignified manner and is not designed as a means of seeking professional employment. Drinker, Legal Ethics, page 248; Texas Opinions 103 (September, 1954) and 210 (December, 1960); ABA Opinion 74 (August, 1932), and ABA Informal Decisions 529 (March, 1962), 656 (May, 1963), 707 (December, 1963) and 795 (April, 1965.) Thus, it is clear that both the incumbent Judge and his opponent may ethically advertise their political candidacy in the Council's newspaper. (8-0.)

One member of the Committee feels that it would be improper for the incumbent Judge to include in his advertisement the fact that he is a member of the Board of Trustees of the Council since same would be in the nature of self-laudation. Canon 24, however, prohibits self-laudation only as an indirect solicitation of professional employment and since the apparent purpose in this instance would be to solicit votes rather than professional employment, the majority of the Committee is of the opinion that the Judge would not violate Canon 24 by including in his advertisement the fact that he is a Trustee of the Council. (7-1.)

The foregoing opinion is limited to the Canons of Ethics governing the conduct of attorneys and we express no opinion as to any question of judicial ethics.

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 340 (1968)