Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee weighs in on judicial assistants running for office
Can a judge continue to employ a judicial assistant who has qualified to run for public office?
Yes, according to the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee, as long as the judge avoids participating in any aspect of their JA’s campaign for a non-partisan public office and enforces strict office rules of no campaign-related work, calls, or emails during the workday, and reiterates that the judge’s name or position may not be used or referenced during fundraising activities.
If the judge can do that, it would not be viewed as endorsing or lending the prestige of office for the advancement of the judicial assistant’s private interests, according to JEAC Opinion No. 2024-10, released August 2.
The committee also said the “mere fact” that the judge “allows” the judicial assistant to run for such office is not viewed as an endorsement of their candidacy.
The inquiring judge currently serves as the only county court judge in the county. The judge’s JA has served for many years as a judicial assistant, and previously as a clerk in the clerk of court’s office. The judicial assistant has qualified to run for clerk of court for that county.
In JEAC Op. 92-33, the committee opined that Canon 7 applied to JAs, so that they were precluded from engaging in partisan political activities. However, in JEAC Op. 92-33, this matter was re-addressed by the Florida Supreme Court in conference on September 8, 1992, and by letter advised the JEAC that it was the unanimous opinion of the court that a JA may not be prohibited from engaging in partisan political activity during personal time, providing such activity is conducted entirely independently of the judge and without reference to the judge or the judge’s office. See Fla. JEAC Op. 93-45.
The committee cautioned the judge to avoid any conduct, statements, or actions, on or off the bench, that may be perceived as favoring or endorsing their JA during the campaign.
“As the JA’s supervisor, the inquiring judge must enforce office rules and expectations of no campaign related work, calls, or e-mails during the workday, and reiterate that the judge’s name or office must not be used or referenced during fundraising activities,” the committee said. “No courthouse resources such as paper, printer, scanner, etc., may be used. There can be no campaign related conversations with attorneys, litigants or other stakeholders who phone into or visit the judge’s office or courtroom. No campaign related activity may occur at the courthouse. Time sheets must also accurately reflect all leave taken by the JA to campaign.”
The committee concluded that as long as the inquiring judge avoids any personal participation in the JA’s campaign and ensures that no campaign activities take place in any way at the courthouse, the inquiring judge would be in compliance with the judicial canons.
The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee is charged with rendering advisory opinions to judges and judicial candidates on the application of the Code of Judicial Conduct to their circumstances. While judges and candidates may cite the opinion as evidence of good faith, the opinions are not binding on the Judicial Qualifications Commission.
