1996-19: Non-Candidate Judge Featured as the Speaker at a County Lincoln Day Dinner Promoted by a Political Party

DISCLAIMER:  This Opinion interprets the 1993 Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct, which was superseded on January 1, 2023, by the 2023 Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct.  This Opinion does not consider or address whether the 2023 Code affects the analysis or conclusion of the Opinion.  A table cross-referencing the 1993 Code to the 2023 Code can be found at  IJEC CORRELATION TABLE.

IJEC Opinion No. 1996-19

September 16, 1996

TOPIC        

Non-candidate judge featured as the speaker at a county Lincoln Day Dinner promoted by a political party. 

DIGEST

A judge may be the featured speaker at a political party Lincoln day dinner that is held after the election only if the event is a community gathering rather than a fundraiser for the political organization. 

REFERENCES

Illinois Supreme Court Rule 67A(1)(c), B(1) and C of the Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 7 (145 Ill.2d R. 67). 

FACTS

On or about Lincoln's birthday many political party county organizations promote an annual party. In off-years, the date is long after the election and too soon to start on the next one, and is thus not like an ordinary political function. The judge has been asked to be the featured speaker on the topic of domestic violence cases in the courts. 

QUESTION

May the judge accept the invitation of a political party to make a speech at a Lincoln Day Dinner? 

OPINION

The judge may accept an invitation to be the featured speaker at a political dinner and speak on the topic of domestic violence cases in the courts if the dinner is not a fundraiser, and if such a speech does not otherwise compromise the judge's independence or integrity. 

When analyzing such an invitation to speak, it is necessary to make further inquiry about the nature of the dinner to ascertain if it is a community event or a fundraiser. The nature of the dinner determines if the judge is speaking on behalf of the legal system or on behalf of the political party. 

Rule 67 allows a judge to participate in political activities to the extent of identifying himself or herself as a member of a political party, buying tickets to and attending a political function, and contributing to a political organization. It forbids a non-candidate judge from making speeches on behalf of a political organization, but allows a judge to make speeches on behalf of measures to improve the law, the legal system or the administration of justice. Supreme Court Rule 67 states in pertinent part: 

A. All Judges and Candidates.

(1) Except as authorized in subsections B(1)(b) and B(3), a judge or a candidate for election to judicial office shall not 

*** 

(c) make speeches on behalf of a political organization; 

*** 

B. Authorized Activities for Judges and Candidates.

(1) A judge or candidate may, except as prohibited

by law:

(a) at any time

(i) purchase tickets for and attend political gatherings;

(ii) identify himself or herself as a member of a political party; and

(iii) contribute to a political organization; 

***        

C. Incumbent Judges. A judge shall not engage in any political activity except (i) as authorized under any other provision of this Code, (ii) on behalf of measures to improve the law, the legal system or the administration of justice, or (iii) as expressly authorized by law. 

Webster's New World Dictionary defines "on behalf of" as "in the interest of; for" and "speaking for; representing". 

In the fact situation presented, the propriety of speaking at a Lincoln Day political dinner would depend on the nature of the dinner. For example, if the charge for the dinner covers the cost of the dinner and publicity, and the event is generally attended by people from the community, the judge would be speaking on behalf of measures to improve the law, the legal system or the administration of justice. However, the situation would be different if any amount above the dinner cost is retained by the political organization. If the event has any fundraising component, the judge's speech would be made on behalf of the political party. Although the topic of the judge's speech (domestic violence cases in the courts) is the same, the circumstances surrounding it clearly change the propriety of the judge's participation. At a political fundraiser, even a non-political speech must be considered to be made on behalf of the political party, an activity which is prohibited by Rule 67A(1)(c) for a non-candidate judge.