The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee is mailing letters to the 13 candidates in contested races for nonpartisan judicial office in the Nov. 5 election, asking that they sign an agreement with the committee pledging to "conduct my campaign with dignity and integrity and in accordance with the Kentucky Code of Judicial Conduct. I further agree to disavow advertisements that use false or misleading information and/or accusations to impugn the integrity of the judicial system, the integrity of a candidate, or erode public trust and confidence in the independence and impartiality of the judiciary." The committee will post a list of those who have signed the pledge.
The contested races are:
Supreme Court (1st District): Shea Nickell vs. Whitney Westerfield
Court of Appeals (3rd District): Jacqueline Caldwell vs. Michael Caperton
The contested races are:
Supreme Court (1st District): Shea Nickell vs. Whitney Westerfield
Court of Appeals (3rd District): Jacqueline Caldwell vs. Michael Caperton
7th Circuit Judge (Logan and Todd counties): Joe Hendricks vs. Joe Ross
22nd Circuit Judge (4th Division, Fayette County): Julie Muth Goodman vs. John Reynolds
35th Circuit Judge Family Court (Pike County): Kent Varney vs. Justin Cory Hamilton
22nd Circuit Judge (4th Division, Fayette County): Julie Muth Goodman vs. John Reynolds
35th Circuit Judge Family Court (Pike County): Kent Varney vs. Justin Cory Hamilton
46th District Judge (Breckinridge, Grayson, Meade): Bradley Butler, Zanda Myers and Beth Ratley
The letter to each candidate reads:
The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee is a private, non-partisan, non-governmental group created in 2005 to promote judicial elections that support a fair and independent Kentucky judiciary. The KJCCC has helped keep most Kentucky judicial campaigns fair and dignified for the last 14 years. We are not a government agency and have no power to discipline candidates who violate the Code of Judicial Conduct (SCR 4.300).
In January 2018, the Supreme Court of Kentucky amended the Code. New Canon 4 replaced old Canon 5, and Rule 4.1 was issued to conform to the requirements of Winter v. Wolnitzek, 186 F.Supp. 3d 673 (E.D.Ky. 2016). The rule describes what is, and is not, permitted in Kentucky judicial campaigns under the First Amendment, and the code’s preamble notes that judicial candidates are also governed by “general ethical standards.” The KJCCC’s standards reflect that fact, and are intended to keep nonpartisan judicial campaigns from becoming like partisan campaigns for executive or legislative office. We believe that has served the state and its judiciary well and is a hallmark of our system’s excellence.
The KJCCC asks that you campaign in a fair and dignified manner and that you refrain from:
1) making false or misleading statements;
2) making statements that indicate how you would rule in a pending case or type of case, or call into question the obligation to decide matters impartially and without pre-judgment;
3) campaigning as if the election is a partisan election. Judicial elections in Kentucky are non-partisan for a reason – to assure the public that the candidate will, if elected, treat everyone the same without regard to political affiliation. “The interest is not in preventing bias against parties; the interest is in preventing judges from being too involved in political machines.” (Winter v. Wolnitzek, p. 28; Rule 4.1 governs political activity.)
4) making personal attacks on an opponent. Judicial elections should be above such tactics, and, to the credit of judicial candidates over the years, we’ve seen very few attack ads. We also ask that you disavow personal, misleading of false attacks made by other parties.
We are enclosing a campaign pledge and the procedures by which complaints can be made. We will investigate complaints promptly and speak out (by press release or letter) to respond to what we believe is unfair campaigning. Send an email to KJCCC Secretary Al Cross and me (addresses above) if you believe you have been the victim of unfair campaigning. We have no power to discipline, only the power of persuasion.
We offer you our best wishes for a campaign that will enhance the reputation of the Court of Justice.
Sincerely,
Cecile Schubert
Vice Chair and acting Chair
The letter to each candidate reads:
The Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee is a private, non-partisan, non-governmental group created in 2005 to promote judicial elections that support a fair and independent Kentucky judiciary. The KJCCC has helped keep most Kentucky judicial campaigns fair and dignified for the last 14 years. We are not a government agency and have no power to discipline candidates who violate the Code of Judicial Conduct (SCR 4.300).
In January 2018, the Supreme Court of Kentucky amended the Code. New Canon 4 replaced old Canon 5, and Rule 4.1 was issued to conform to the requirements of Winter v. Wolnitzek, 186 F.Supp. 3d 673 (E.D.Ky. 2016). The rule describes what is, and is not, permitted in Kentucky judicial campaigns under the First Amendment, and the code’s preamble notes that judicial candidates are also governed by “general ethical standards.” The KJCCC’s standards reflect that fact, and are intended to keep nonpartisan judicial campaigns from becoming like partisan campaigns for executive or legislative office. We believe that has served the state and its judiciary well and is a hallmark of our system’s excellence.
The KJCCC asks that you campaign in a fair and dignified manner and that you refrain from:
1) making false or misleading statements;
2) making statements that indicate how you would rule in a pending case or type of case, or call into question the obligation to decide matters impartially and without pre-judgment;
3) campaigning as if the election is a partisan election. Judicial elections in Kentucky are non-partisan for a reason – to assure the public that the candidate will, if elected, treat everyone the same without regard to political affiliation. “The interest is not in preventing bias against parties; the interest is in preventing judges from being too involved in political machines.” (Winter v. Wolnitzek, p. 28; Rule 4.1 governs political activity.)
4) making personal attacks on an opponent. Judicial elections should be above such tactics, and, to the credit of judicial candidates over the years, we’ve seen very few attack ads. We also ask that you disavow personal, misleading of false attacks made by other parties.
We are enclosing a campaign pledge and the procedures by which complaints can be made. We will investigate complaints promptly and speak out (by press release or letter) to respond to what we believe is unfair campaigning. Send an email to KJCCC Secretary Al Cross and me (addresses above) if you believe you have been the victim of unfair campaigning. We have no power to discipline, only the power of persuasion.
We offer you our best wishes for a campaign that will enhance the reputation of the Court of Justice.
Sincerely,
Cecile Schubert
Vice Chair and acting Chair
