Arizona Justice of the Peace Candidate Suceeds on Free Speech Claim

ARIZONA SUPREME COURT JUDICIAL ETHICS ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVERSES PRIOR OPINIONS AND ITS OWN CANNONS OF ETHICS – LETS MINISTER/ATTORNEY ENCOURAGE PUBLIC TO VOTE THEIR VALUES IN THE UPCOMING ELECTION.

For years Arizona has prohibited any
judicial candidate the right to speak out about legal or political
issues. Kingman, Arizona Justice of the Peace candidate Randolph D.
Wolfson, an attorney practicing for 24 years and an ordained minister,
wrote the Arizona Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee demanding an
official Advisory Opinion seeking to have the State comply with 1^st Amendment Free Speech provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

When he was told no such opinion would be issued before the November 7^th
General Election, Wolfson, on October 3, 2006, filed suit in the
Federal District Court of Arizona under the Civil Rights Act, §1983,
seeking an injunction against, among other things, any action against
any judicial candidate or judge for speaking publicly in support of the
Ballot Proposition 107 – the Arizona Marriage Protection Amendment or
any other disputed legal or political issue.

This morning, the Arizona Supreme Court suspended its rules prohibiting
an Advisory Opinion while litigation is pending. That opened the way
for Arizona Supreme Court Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee to issue
an opinion – which it promptly did – reversing previous opinions and
limiting its own Cannons of Ethical Conduct. The Committee today
Ordered "A judicial candidate may publicly discuss his or her personal
opinion of an initiative measure or other political subject…because a
candidate may express views on any disputed issue." The Committee cited
the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in the case Republican Party vs. White
for its need to make a turn about in Arizona law because the United
States Supreme Court directed "that the First Amendment permits
judicial candidates to inform the electorate by expressing the
candidates’ views on disputed political or legal issues."

A hearing for a Preliminary Injunction is scheduled before the Arizona
Federal District Court on October 31, 2006 on the remainder of Mr.
Wolfson’s Civil Rights claims involving Arizona’s prohibitions against
judicial candidates soliciting or directly receiving campaign
contributions, prohibitions against endorsing or publicly supporting
other candidates; speaking for a political organization or party and
other constitutional protected free speech issues.

Today Judge Niel V. Wake, Federal District Court Judge recused himself
from the case without comment. The case has been reassigned to Judge
Stephen M. MacNamee. MacNamee was appointed by Pres. George H. Bush in
1990.

Justice of the Peace candidate Wolfson said "This election is very
important to me and I have exerted my full effort to run for this
office. However, at every turn I have been hamstrung by the burden of
the overbearing and unfair restraints placed on my right to speak to
the issues of the day. Today, I am proud to tell the voters of Arizona
that her judges have finally been set free."

"Aside from being able to lead hundreds of the lost to a saving
knowledge in Jesus Christ, I think this is the most important thing I
have accomplished in my 24 year law practice", Wolfson said.

When asked what importance the decision will have for Arizona, Wolfson
said, "Today, with the agreement of the Supreme Court’s Judicial Ethics
Committee, the culture of Arizona has been forever changed. Starting
today, voters can demand accountability from their judges. From now on,
judges shall be elected or removed from office based on the candidate’s
stated values and beliefs and not just upon who knows the candidate or
what party they may support."

Wolfson said " I am proud of the Ethic’s Committee’s determination to
support the a policy of free political and religious speech. This is a
great day for freedom, a great day for Arizona."