The Limits of White

By Gray, Cynthia | Judicature, May/June 2006 | Go to article overview

The Limits of White


Gray, Cynthia, Judicature


Many would read Republican Party of Minnesota v. White expansively, but to do so is an unjustified abandonment of the state courts' efforts to promote judicial integrity, impartiality, and independence.

Relying on recent federal decisions, judicial candidates and others are testing the limits of what campaign and political conduct is acceptable for judges and judicial candidates. In a challenge to a provision in the Minnesota code of judicial conduct, the United States Supreme Court held that states could not, consistent with the First Amendment, prohibit judicial candidates from announcing their views on disputed legal and political issues.1 On remand, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that prohibitions on judicial candidates identifying themselves as members of a political organization, attending political gatherings, using endorsements from political organizations, and personally soliciting contributions from large groups or in writing are also unconstitutional.2

No doubt some who continue to defend traditional interpretations of all the canons are unrealistically optimistic about the limits of the decision in White or simply disagree with it. Other groups, however, have just as clearly exaggerated the effect of the holdings and argued, in comments filed with the American Bar Association Joint Commission to Evaluate the Model Code, that almost all restrictions on the political activity of all judges should be eliminated-not just the restrictions on campaign activity and not just the restrictions on elected judges. That argument goes far beyond the actual holdings, and such an expansive reading is an unjustified abandonment of the state courts' efforts to promote judicial integrity, impartiality, and independence.

Although the Supreme Court majority opinion had some broad comments about judicial impartiality, the primary focus of the opinion was allowing candidates to communicate relevant information to voters during an election campaign. It is not likely that the justices intended to announce a principle that would allow even federal judges to, for example, serve as leaders of political parties and endorse candidates for president, which is the position the Joint Commission is being urged to take. Moreover, it is important to consider before attempting to apply the holding to other contexts that the vote was 5-4, and that two members of the majority are no longer with the Court.

Partisan activity

Because the Eighth Circuit is not the Supreme Court, states in other circuits or with different canons are not compelled to follow the remand decision, particularly in light of the very convincing dissent and some flaws in the majority's argument. The majority did not even understand what the case was about, claiming it was "not about what happens after an election." The interest advanced by the state, however, was judicial impartiality, clearly and crucially implicating the judicial decision making that "happens after an election."

The majority concluded that the Minnesota canon's ban on involvement with political parties was underinclusive because it did not prohibit membership in interest groups such as the National Rifle Association or the National Organization for Women. Even assuming that membership in those organizations is not prohibited under other provisions of the code, the majority itself elsewhere explained why such a distinction is legitimate: associating with an interest group that is narrowly focused on particular issues "conveys a much stronger message of alignment with particular political views and outcomes," and, therefore, is more likely to be protected under White than association with a political party.

Moreover, as the dissent argued, the partisan activities clause regulates "a judicial candidate's relations with people, and organizations of people, not the candidate's relations with issues."

[O]nce the partisan activities clauses are gone, having espoused similar positions on issues will be the least significant aspect of the party's relationship to its successful candidate; the truly significant point is that the candidate may owe his or her accession to the bench to the litigant before the bar and may be similarly dependent on that litigant for any hope of success in future elections. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Limits of White
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.