Keeping Mud off the Bench: The First Amendment and Regulation of Candidates' False or Misleading Statements in Judicial Elections

In the last fifty years, perhaps no facet of American constitutional democracy has changed more than campaigns for judicial office. Judicial elections long stood in sharp contrast to elections for executive, legislative, or administrative office. In keeping with the judicial role of impartial adjudicator, judicial candidates historically avoided political controversy and campaigned on "polite promises of integrity." During the late twentieth century, judicial elections were transformed from their more humble, less contentious beginnings into elections virtually indistinguishable, in both financial scope and campaign conduct, from other political campaigns.