News

Supreme Court Amends Campaign Rules Governing Judicial Candidates

November 10, 2002

HARRISBURG, November 21, 2002 — Chief Justice of Pennsylvania Stephen A. Zappala announced today that the Supreme Court is amending its conduct rules for judges and district justices to address campaign ethics and the administration of justice. Separate amendments were made today by the court to Canon 7B(1)(c) of the Code of Judicial Conduct — which governs judges and judicial candidates of the Common Pleas and appellate courts — and to Rule 15D(3) of the Rules Governing Standards of Conduct of District Justices. Both orders take effect immediately. The first change involves deleting the following language from the text of proscribed conduct in the rules: “announce his views on disputed legal or political issues.” A second change involves adding a provision in conformance with the American Bar Association's Model Code of Judicial Conduct. The amendment prohibits judicial candidates from making “statements that commit or appear to commit the candidate with respect to cases, controversies or issues that are likely to come before the court.” (Copies of the amended canon and rule are attached below.) “The fundamental need for judicial impartiality and the appearance thereof — a cornerstone of public trust and confidence in the courts — must be carefully balanced with some of the practical considerations attending campaigns,” Chief Justice Zappala said. “The changes adopted today underscore the court’s paramount concern with integrity in the judicial process, including judicial campaigns.” Pennsylvania is one of about 40 states with some type of judicial elections. Most have limits on what judicial candidates can say or do while campaigning. The judicial codes of 23 states include the ABA Model Code provision adopted today by the court; seven others have similar provisions. The latest changes were in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2002 ruling in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White that found the "announce clause" in Minnesota's canons of judicial conduct violative of the First Amendment.