ABSTRACT
In Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 US 765, and the US Supreme Court expanded freedom of speech for state judicial candidates. Although the president appoints all federal judges with the advice and consent of the US Senate, many state judges are elected. The Supreme Court's answer-the First Amendment is trump-came in the Republican Party case from Minnesota, one of thirty-nine states that elect judges on a partisan or nonpartisan basis. When Gregory Wersal first sought the Republican endorsement for a nonpartisan seat on Minnesota's Supreme Court, he was confronted with the state Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibited judicial candidates from announcing their views "on disputed legal or political issues." The Court recognized an important public interest in having an impartial judiciary, but concluded that Minnesota's ban was not narrowly tailored to achieve impartiality or the appearance of it.
