Can a judge use the names and addresses of former jurors to send out re-election campaign mailings?

Plain-English summary

The opinion addressed a judge who had compiled a computer record of people who had served as jurors in the judge's court, drawn from juror questionnaires and other court records, and proposed to send those former jurors a letter seeking permission to use their names in support of the judge's candidacy. The judge also asked whether that compiled information was public information that had to be shared with an election opponent.

The Committee applied MCJC 5C(7), which provides that information acquired by a judge in a judicial capacity should not be used or disclosed for financial dealings or any other purpose not related to judicial duties. Because information about jurors is acquired in the judge's judicial capacity, and a re-election campaign is not part of judicial duties, the Committee concluded that the judge may not use that information to solicit campaign support. It added that MCJC 2C would also bar the judge from using the judicial office, including access to records because of the position, to enhance personal election chances.

On the second question, the Committee noted that whether the compiled information is public information is a legal question on which it does not opine, but observed that MCR 2.510 allows only judges, clerks, parties, and their lawyers to examine juror questionnaires under prescribed conditions. The Committee reaffirmed that juror information should not be disclosed or used by a judge or judicial candidate if acquired in a judicial capacity, so it is unavailable both to the opponent and to the judge for the proposed purpose, making the juror-letter question moot.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995 and interprets the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct as it then stood. The MCJC has since been amended (the State Bar flags amendments effective August 1, 2013 to Canons 2, 4, 5, and 7, among other revisions), and later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a judge mail re-election materials to former jurors using court records?

A: Per the opinion, no. The Committee concluded a judge may not use jury records for the judge's personal election mailings.

Q: Why is juror information off-limits for campaign use?

A: The opinion reasoned that juror information is acquired in a judicial capacity, and under MCJC 5C(7) such information may not be used for any purpose unrelated to judicial duties; a re-election campaign is not a judicial duty.

Q: Is the compiled juror list public information the opponent can get?

A: The opinion treated that as a legal question it does not decide, but noted MCR 2.510 limits who may examine juror questionnaires and reaffirmed the information should not be used or disclosed by the judge for non-judicial purposes.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct, principally MCJC 5C(7) (use of information acquired in a judicial capacity) and MCJC 2C (prestige of office), and references MCJC 7B(2)(a) on campaign conduct. It also cites the court rule governing access to juror questionnaires, MCR 2.510.

Citations and references

Rules of Judicial Conduct and Court Rules:

• MCJC 2C (prestige of office)
• MCJC 5C(7) (information acquired in a judicial capacity)
• MCJC 7B(2)(a) (campaign conduct)
• MCR 2.510 (access to juror questionnaires)

See also

• Mich Ethics Op. JI-47: Judge's Spouse in Politics
• Mich Ethics Op. JI-55: Charitable Sentencing Payments

Source

• Landing page: https://www.michbar.org/opinions/ethics/numbered_opinions?OpinionID=813&Type=6

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

JI-104

October 5, 1995

SYLLABUS

A judge may not use jury records for the judge's personal election mailings.

A judge may not personally solicit public statements of support from persons who have served as jurors in the judge's court.

References: MCJC 2C, 5C(7), 7B(2)(a); MCR 2.510.

TEXT

A judge inquires whether it is ethical to solicit public statements of support from persons who have previously served as jurors in the judge's court. The judge has obtained juror information from juror questionnaires or from other court records, and has a computer record of those who have, over the years, served as jurors. The judge proposes to send the former jurors a letter seeking

permission to use the former juror's name in support of the judge's candidacy.

The judge also asks whether the information compiled is "public information" which must be shared with an election opponent.

MCJC 5C(7) states:

"Information acquired by a judge in a judicial capacity should not be used or disclosed by the judge in financial dealings or for any other purpose not related to judicial duties." Emphasis added.

The Committee would have reservations about a judge using juror information obtained in an official judicial capacity for the judge's own political advantage. Use by a judge in a re-election campaign of information about the identity, addresses or other information about jurors disclosed in their questionnaires or during the jury selection process would violate the provisions of MCJC 5C(7) and would not be permitted.

Information about jurors is information acquired by the judge in the judge's judicial capacity. The judge is prohibited from using or disclosing that information for "any other purpose not related to judicial duties." The judge's re-election efforts are not part of "judicial duties." MCJC 2C also would prohibit the judge from using judicial office, i.e., access to records because of his judicial position, to enhance personal election chances. Therefore the juror information the judge has acquired is not available for the purposes of soliciting campaign support.

The judge's second inquiry is whether juror information compiled by the judge is "public information" which must be shared with any opponent. This calls for a conclusion of law. The Committee does not render advisory opinions with regard to legal questions, however the Committee notes that MCR 2.510 specifies that only judges, clerks, parties to actions and their lawyers are allowed to examine juror questionnaires, and then only under conditions prescribed by local court rule enacted under the guidance of the State Court Administrator's Office. This reaffirms the Committee's conclusion that juror information should not be disclosed or used by a judge or judicial candidate if it was acquired by a judge in a judicial capacity.

Not only would the information be unavailable to the judge's opponent, but it would also be unavailable to the judge for any purpose not related to the judge's judicial responsibilities.

Since the information cannot be used for the proposed purpose, the inquiry concerning the juror letter is moot.