Pennsylvania Code › Title 207 - JUDICIAL CONDUCT › Part II - CONDUCT STANDARDS › Chapter 33 - CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT › Subchapter B - FORMAL OPINIONS › Section 99-1 - Campaign Advertising

Current through Register Vol. 54, No. 28, July 13, 2024
The Code of Judicial Conduct provides that a candidate for
					 judicial office, including an incumbent judge, should maintain the dignity
					 appropriate to judicial office (Canon 7). Campaign advertising must, therefore,
					 be dignified and appropriate to judicial office. The electorate is best served
					 by advertising which accurately showcases the candidate's credentials. The ads
					 should not pander to the electorate. The candidate must take particular care
					 that the ad does not in any way suggest that he or she will favor any
					 particular group of litigants or make decisions on any basis other than the
					 facts and the law.
A campaign ad may compare a candidate's credentials to
					 those of other candidates for the same office. However, Canon 7 provides that a
					 candidate should not misrepresent his qualifications or any other fact. A
					 candidate must be scrupulously careful that what the ads say about the
					 candidate's opponents is accurate. Once again, the ads must be dignified.
					 Vituperative personal attacks against one's opponents are per se
					 undignified.
The Ethics Committee will not approve or disapprove any
					 particular campaign ad. Moreover, if a candidate seeks and obtains advice from
					 the Committee regarding campaign advertising, the candidate may not claim that
					 the Committee's advice constitutes an endorsement or approval of a particular
					 campaign ad.
A candidate is responsible for any ads published by his or
					 her campaign committee. A candidate should not permit others nor suggest to
					 others that they publish ads which contravene the constraints of the
					 Canons.
* Canon 7 does not specifically proscribe "negative
					 advertising." While in some limited circumstances negative advertising may be
					 appropriate, given the nature of political ads, the Committee strongly
					 discourages negative ads. Given the time limits of television and radio ads (10
					 and 30 second spots), it is very difficult to say something negative about
					 one's opponent which is not misleading. One could, for instance, say of a
					 sitting judge, "Judge X freed three accused murderers." Though such a statement
					 might be accurate, it might also be misrepresentation by innuendo. If, for
					 instance, Judge X freed the accused murderers because either the judge or the
					 jury acquitted the accused, then the effect of the ad would be to vilify
					 someone for doing what was totally proper. The clear implication of the ad is
					 that the judge treated murderers leniently, which is misleading.
* An ad should not paint an attorney with the reputation of
					 his or her clients.
* An ad which either directly or by innuendo refers to the
					 ethnic background of one's opponent is improper.
* To suggest that one's opponent favors one gender over
					 another simply because he or she is of the opposite gender of the candidate
					 being promoted by an ad would be a totally baseless falsification. If, on the
					 other hand, a candidate acted in a manner which truly indicated gender bias,
					 that fact would be fair comment.
* An ad can be accurate, but it can also be misleading. An
					 ad which is factually accurate, but is intended to mislead the electorate by
					 giving a false impression about one's opponent violates Canon 7. Once again,
					 the electorate is best served by ads which showcase a candidate's credentials
					 and seek the support of the electorate on the basis of those
					 credentials.
In summary, Canon 7 provides that:
A candidate . . . should maintain the dignity appropriate
					 to judicial office . . . [and] should not make pledges or promises of conduct
					 in office other than the faithful and impartial performance of the duties of
					 the office; announce his views on disputed legal or political issues; or
					 misrepresent his identity, qualifications, present position, or other fact .
					 ..
The principal parameters of campaign advertising are
					 accuracy and dignity.
At the end of the Code of Judicial Conduct is a section
					 entitled "Reliance on Advisory Opinions" which provides that although the
					 advisory opinions of the Judicial Ethics Committee are not binding upon the
					 [Judicial Conduct Board and the Court of Judicial Discipline] and the Supreme
					 Court of Pennsylvania, the opinions shall be taken into account in determining
					 whether discipline should be recommended or imposed. The "rule of reliance"
					 applies to this Formal Opinion. However, before engaging in contemplated
					 conduct, any judge who, out of an abundance of caution, desires a Committee
					 opinion which will provide advice about the judge's particular set of facts and
					 to which the "rule of reliance" will also apply, may submit an inquiry to a
					 member of the Committee, ordinarily, a member serving in the judge's Conference
					 zone.