Can lawyers who practice before a judge contribute to, or solicit contributions for, the judge's campaign expenses?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether attorneys who regularly practice before a court of record could solicit contributions to pay the filing fee of an unopposed judge in the Democratic Primary, and whether attorneys could make direct contributions over $50 to or for the judge for that purpose.

Answering the questions generally rather than only for an uncontested primary, the Committee held unanimously that attorneys may ethically assist judicial candidates in defraying campaign expenses, either by direct contributions or by soliciting contributions, so long as there is no improper motivation. It said it is immaterial whether the candidate is unopposed and the amount of the contribution is not controlling.

The Committee read Canon 2 as imposing a duty on lawyers to support suitable candidates for the judiciary, with financial support being the kind most often needed. It acknowledged that such support could be improperly motivated to curry favor, which would violate Canon 3, but said the impropriety would lie in the motive, and the mere possibility of an improper motive is not a sufficient basis for withholding from lawyers generally the right to give financial support to judicial candidates. The vote was 8-0.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1966, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. Subsequent rule amendments or 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 lawyers contribute money to a judge's campaign?

A: The Committee said yes. Attorneys may assist judicial candidates with campaign expenses by direct contributions, so long as there is no improper motivation, and the amount is not controlling.

Q: Can lawyers solicit contributions for a judicial candidate?

A: Yes. The Committee placed soliciting contributions on the same footing as direct contributions, again subject to there being no improper motivation.

Q: Does it matter that the judge is unopposed?

A: No. The Committee said it is immaterial whether the candidate is unopposed.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 2 (a lawyer's duty to support suitable judicial candidates) and Canon 3 (improper attempts to curry favor with judges). The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.6 (political contributions to obtain government legal engagements or appointments) and Model Rule 8.4 (misconduct), with judicial-campaign support also addressed in the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.6 (political contributions to obtain engagements or appointments), as the modern analog
• MR 8.4 (misconduct), as the modern analog
• Texas Canons 2 and 3 (former canons)

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 340: Advertising a Political Candidacy in an Organization's Newspaper
• TX Ethics Op. 333: Lawyer-Legislator Listing "State Senator" on a Shingle

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-328/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_328.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Is it proper and ethical for attorneys who regularly practice before a court of record to solicit contributions for payment of the filing fee required of such judge in the Democratic Primary election where the judge is unopposed?
Is it proper and ethical for attorneys to make direct contributions in excess of $50.00 to or in behalf of the judge under the circumstances and for the purpose stated in question 1?

23 Baylor L. Rev. 856 (1972)

POLITICAL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FOR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES
It is ethical for attorneys to assist judicial candidates with respect to campaign expenses either by direct contributions or by soliciting contributions so long as there is no improper motivation.

Canons 2, 3.

While the questions are presented in terms of an uncontested primary election we answer them generally and it is the unanimous opinion of the Committee that attorneys may ethically assist judicial candidates in the defrayment of campaign expenses either by direct contributions or by soliciting contributions so long as there is no improper motivation. It is immaterial whether the candidate is unopposed and the amount of the contribution is not controlling.

Canon 2 seems to impose a duty upon lawyers to support suitable candidates for the judiciary, and probably the support most often needed is financial support. Of course such support could be improperly motivated for the purpose of currying favor. If so, there would be a violation of Canon 3. The impropriety, however, would lie in the motive and the mere possibility of such an im- proper motive is not a sufficient basis for withholding from lawyers generally the right to give financial support to judicial candidates. (8-0. )

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 328 (1966)