All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Making the Court Come to Life: Developing Effective Judicial Politics Simulations
Unformatted Document Text:  confidence by limited explicit statements about issues that could potentially come before the judicial branch in the future. 8 The clause was challenged by judicial candidate Gregory Wersal, who argued that the “announce clause,” as well as the “partisan activities clause” (which limited candidates’ ability to take part in events or activities sponsored by their political party) and the “solicitation clause” (which prohibited candidates from directly soliciting funds for their campaign) violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court accepted the case for review and declared the “announce clause” unconstitutional, but failed to make any decision on the “partisan activities clause” or the “solicitation clause.” These questions were remanded to the 8 th Circuit for further proceedings. Although only eight other states had the “announce clause” in their codes of judicial conduct, the White decision was widely recognized as having broad implications for other provisions that are commonly found in state codes of judicial conduct, most notably the “pledges and promises clause” (which prohibits candidates from making pledges or promises of behavior in judicial office other than the faithful and impartial performance of their judicial duties) and the “commit clause” (which prohibits candidates from “committing” themselves on cases or controversies likely to come before the court), as well as the “partisan activities clause” and the “solicitation clause. 9 ” In August of 2005, the 8 th Circuit handed down its ruling, which overturned both the “partisan activities clause” and the “solicitation clause” based upon the reasoning offered in the majority opinion in White. This decision was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court in Dimick v. Republican Party of Minnesota. The Supreme Court denied certiorari. 8 Republican Party of Minnesota v. White 536 U.S. 765 (2002). 9 In some form, all of these have been adopted by the ABA’s Model Code of Judicial Conduct

Authors: Caufield, Rachel.
first   previous   Page 8 of 39   next   last



background image
confidence by limited explicit statements about issues that could potentially come before the
judicial branch in the future.
The clause was challenged by judicial candidate Gregory Wersal, who argued that the
“announce clause,” as well as the “partisan activities clause” (which limited candidates’ ability to
take part in events or activities sponsored by their political party) and the “solicitation
clause” (which prohibited candidates from directly soliciting funds for their campaign) violated
the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court accepted the case for review
and declared the “announce clause” unconstitutional, but failed to make any decision on the
“partisan activities clause” or the “solicitation clause.” These questions were remanded to the 8
th
Circuit for further proceedings.
Although only eight other states had the “announce clause” in their codes of judicial
conduct, the White decision was widely recognized as having broad implications for other
provisions that are commonly found in state codes of judicial conduct, most notably the “pledges
and promises clause” (which prohibits candidates from making pledges or promises of behavior
in judicial office other than the faithful and impartial performance of their judicial duties) and the
“commit clause” (which prohibits candidates from “committing” themselves on cases or
controversies likely to come before the court), as well as the “partisan activities clause” and the
“solicitation clause.
In August of 2005, the 8
th
Circuit handed down its ruling, which overturned both the
“partisan activities clause” and the “solicitation clause” based upon the reasoning offered in the
majority opinion in White. This decision was then appealed to the United States Supreme Court
in Dimick v. Republican Party of Minnesota. The Supreme Court denied certiorari.
8
Republican Party of Minnesota v. White 536 U.S. 765 (2002).
9
In some form, all of these have been adopted by the ABA’s Model Code of Judicial Conduct


Convention
Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 8 of 39   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.