PRESS RELEASE
Thursday,March18,2004
Contact: James Bopp, Jr., General Counsel
Phone 812/232-2434; Fax 812/235-3685
madisoncenter@aol.com

 

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit disposed of the central issue and decided several remaining issues in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White (2002).  In White, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Minnesota's rule forbidding judicial candidates from announcing their views on disputed legal or political issues, then sent the case back to the Eight Circuit. 

In a March 16, 2004, decision, the Eighth Circuit ordered a lower court to permanently enjoin the ban on announcing judicial views.  The Court upheld a Minnesota rule that banned personal solicitation of campaign funds by judicial candidates.  It then ordered the lower court in the case to reconsider the constitutionality of  rules that banned certain partisan political activities by judicial candidates   a provision that forbids judicial candidates from being endorsed by political parties and other provisions forbidding judicial candidates from attending or speaking at political gatherings. 

According to James Bopp, Jr., who argued White in the U.S. Supreme Court, "The Eighth Circuit  takes the Supreme Court decision a few steps forward.  It finds that the reasoning of White also brings into question other restrictions on judicial candidates, such as rules that forbid them from attending  political gatherings.  This is a victory for the First Amendment and open elections."

Even so, Bopp says that the Eighth Circuit should have gone further. "The court upheld the solicitation ban and side-stepped the obvious conclusion that the bans on partisan political speech by judicial candidates violates the First Amendment.  If the State can't forbid judicial candidates from announcing their views on political or legal issues to the whole wide world, then it can't forbid candidates from speaking at political party meetings."

Bopp stated that the plaintiffs would ask the entire Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider the solicitation and partisan activities bans, striking them down without further consideration by the lower court in case.

The majority opinion was written by Judge John R. Gibson, joined by Judge Theodore McMillan.  Judge Clarence A. Beam strongly dissented, arguing that the solicitation and partisan activities restrictions on judicial candidates were clearly unconstitutional under the White decision.


To unsubscribe from the James Madison Center for Free Speech e-mail list, please send an e-mail message with "UNSUBSCRIBE" as the subject to: cbostrom@bopplaw.com.