Antone's Nightclub
Straining the Code of Conduct
RECEIVED Thu., Feb. 28, 2008
Dear Editor,
Last week, an ethics complaint against the campaign of John Lipscombe, candidate for County Court at Law No. 8, was filed for illegally using Mr. Lipscombe's wife, sitting Judge Jan Breland, in his campaign. The Judicial Code of Conduct prevents sitting judges from publicly endorsing any political candidate. The Lipscombe campaign vigorously defended itself by saying they knew there was a problem and thought they had managed to find a way around the Judicial Code of Conduct by putting Judge Breland's name on one Web page but not another or by listing her as a judge in one place but not everyplace. This legalistic maneuvering strains the Code of Conduct.
The dangerous effect of this maneuvering is obvious. Supporters, afraid of publicly endorsing the campaign of Mr. Lipscombe's opponent, Carlos Barrera, are fearful of retribution from a powerful judge if they have business in her court or even at the county attorney's office where Mr. Lipscombe works.
Advertising their husband-wife relationship, a husband and wife who would control one-fourth of all courts at that level, in a Chronicle ad, should be a warning to everyone.
The thing is that we abide by rules: running for office or serving as judge, just as we have to abide by rules when we drive cars or play a sport, and the rules state that a judge cannot do what Jan has done, even if she acted to support her husband, because no one is fearful because of Jan as a wife; they are fearful because Jan is a judge with power over them.
The Judicial Code of Contact is there for a reason, and the Lipscombe campaign should abide by it. Maybe it would be better for John to wait until his wife was not a judge than to risk violating the integrity of the judiciary.
Last week, an ethics complaint against the campaign of John Lipscombe, candidate for County Court at Law No. 8, was filed for illegally using Mr. Lipscombe's wife, sitting Judge Jan Breland, in his campaign. The Judicial Code of Conduct prevents sitting judges from publicly endorsing any political candidate. The Lipscombe campaign vigorously defended itself by saying they knew there was a problem and thought they had managed to find a way around the Judicial Code of Conduct by putting Judge Breland's name on one Web page but not another or by listing her as a judge in one place but not everyplace. This legalistic maneuvering strains the Code of Conduct.
The dangerous effect of this maneuvering is obvious. Supporters, afraid of publicly endorsing the campaign of Mr. Lipscombe's opponent, Carlos Barrera, are fearful of retribution from a powerful judge if they have business in her court or even at the county attorney's office where Mr. Lipscombe works.
Advertising their husband-wife relationship, a husband and wife who would control one-fourth of all courts at that level, in a Chronicle ad, should be a warning to everyone.
The thing is that we abide by rules: running for office or serving as judge, just as we have to abide by rules when we drive cars or play a sport, and the rules state that a judge cannot do what Jan has done, even if she acted to support her husband, because no one is fearful because of Jan as a wife; they are fearful because Jan is a judge with power over them.
The Judicial Code of Contact is there for a reason, and the Lipscombe campaign should abide by it. Maybe it would be better for John to wait until his wife was not a judge than to risk violating the integrity of the judiciary.
Sincerely,
Nicole Bradshaw
Nicole Bradshaw