Judicial ethics panel advises against judge’s attendance at spouse’s political watch party
A judge who is not currently running for election or retention may not attend a victory/watch party for the judge’s spouse who is running for a partisan position as a school superintendent, according to the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee.
The judge’s spouse anticipates scheduling what is known as a “watch party,” likely in a local hotel ballroom. The event would be attended by supporters of the judge’s spouse’s campaign and the judge predicts that most in attendance will be members of the spouse’s political party.
“[W]e must reluctantly advise against the judge’s attendance at this gathering,” the committee wrote in Opinion No. 2024-11, released August 2. “Not because the judge’s unannounced attendance is a ‘public endorsement’ of the judge’s spouse (and whose support most reasonable people would simply assume). Rather, a watch party for a partisan office would appear to be a ‘political function’ generally prohibited under Canon 7A(1)(d), and attending such a watch party, even at the conclusion of a contested, partisan election, would likely constitute ‘political activity’ proscribed under Canon 7D.”
The committee said watch parties in partisan races often become partisan rallies and a watch party for a particular partisan race can often become a watch party for all the partisan races in that election cycle, thus, “[a] post-election gathering can easily become a political event,” which a judge who is not up for election is prohibited from attending under Canons 7A(1)(d) and 7D.
The ethics committee acknowledged “the awkward imposition” Canon 7 places on judges in circumstances such as this.
“No doubt, a judge would want to be by his or her spouse’s side at the conclusion of a contested political campaign to celebrate (or commiserate) with their spouse, depending on the outcome of the election,” the committee noted. “And judges may do so, but not in a public, partisan function such as a watch party.”
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.
