Washington---The US Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld rules that allow states to block judges who are running in elections from soliciting campaign contributions.
A total of 39 of America's 50 states hold elections for local judges, unlike at the federal level where judges, such as the Supreme Court justices, are appointed for life.
Of the states where elections are held, a total of 30 ban judges from soliciting campaign funds, in a move meant to encourage impartiality behind the bench and maintain judicial integrity.
This case centers on Lanell Williams-Yulee, who sent out a fundraising letter in 2009 during an unsuccessful bid to become a county court judge in Florida, where fundraising by judges is prohibited.
Florida authorities prosecuted her for professional misconduct and she was eventually ordered to pay $1,860 in court costs.
Williams-Yulee had argued that she was protected by the First Amendment's free speech provisions.
But the Supreme Court disagreed, with judges voting 5-4 to uphold Florida's complaint.
The ruling, which saw the conservative Chief Justice John Roberts side with the court's four liberal judges, took some observers by surprise because the Supreme Court has in recent years removed limits on contributions made to legislative political candidates.
But Roberts wrote that restrictions should be allowed for judicial candidates.
"Judges are not politicians, even when they come to the bench by way of the ballot," Roberts wrote in his opinion for the majority.
"And a state's decision to elect its judiciary does not compel it to treat judicial candidates like campaigners for political office."
AFP
