MAKE A DONATION
The following is an example of an appropriate questionnaire for judicial candidates, and the questions are entirely consistent with the law as expressed in the U. S. Supreme Court case of Republican Party of Minnesota vs. White, 536 US 765 (2002, 7-2 Opinion):

POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE



Signed and dated questionnaires must be returned by mail:
KJR PAC
105 E. Rhondda Ave.
Andover, Kansas 67002
Fax: 316-733-2550

KANSAS JUDICIAL REVIEW POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE PRINCIPLES:

Kansas Judicial Review upholds the principle that the Kansas Constitution mandates a clear separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislative branches of government. The responsibility of the legislature is to make law and public policy, functions not granted to the judicial branch.

INTRODUCTION

In Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765 (2002, 7-2 opinion), the U.S. Supreme Court held unconstitutional a canon of judicial ethics that prohibited candidates for elective judicial office from announcing their views on disputed legal or political issues. The canon violated the First Amendment because it prohibited speech on the basis of content and burdened speech of political candidates – a category of speech at the core of First Amendment freedoms. Judicial candidates may now clearly express their views on legal and political issues without fear of being sanctioned by judicial or legal ethics authorities for doing so.

Kansas Judicial Review recognizes that judicial candidates should not pledge or promise certain results in a particular case that comes before them. Nevertheless, in judicial elections, voters need to know the views of judicial candidates in order to make intelligent and conscientious decisions regarding candidates’ general views on the law and personal values. This questionnaire is intended to elicit candidates’ views on issues of vital interest to the constituents without subjecting candidates answering its questions to accusations of impartiality or requiring candidates to disqualify themselves in future cases. Kansas Judicial Review does not believe that the questionnaire violates any of Kansas Canons of Judicial Conduct, but it recognizes that respondents may believe that they are prohibited from the questionnaire because of the canons’ formulation.

Questionnaire

Adobe Reader is required to view the questionnaire. page3_2