Judicial Elections and Free Speech
Varying Approaches to Handling the Intersection of Judicial Elections and the Constitutional Guarantee of the Right to Free Speech
Event Video
Judicial selection in the states is not uniform, but most states have some form of judicial elections. Some are contested elections--whether partisan or nonpartisan--and some involve uncontested retention elections. During an election, judicial candidates must abide by ethical rules that explicitly restrict their ability to speak freely.
What are the implications, if any, for restrictions on judicial speech arising from different systems of selecting and retaining judges? How do judicial campaign experiences inform free speech perspectives? Join us for a conversation about how judicial elections intersect with free speech rights.
Featuring:
- Hon. Clint Bolick, Justice, Arizona Supreme Court
- Hon. J. Brett Busby, Justice, Texas Supreme Court
- Hon. Daniel Kelly, Former Justice, Wisconsin Supreme Court
- (Moderator) Hon. G. Barry Anderson, Justice, Minnesota Supreme Court (ret.)
Related Reading(s):
*******
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.