## Facts

- Magistrate Judge William A. Vincent, Jr., of San Juan County, New Mexico, authorized the use of his name in a local Farmington newspaper endorsement supporting Bill Standley for reelection as mayor of Farmington.
- The publication listed Vincent among a group of local citizens endorsing Standley and did not identify Vincent by judicial title.
- Vincent was not a candidate for reelection at the time of the endorsement.
- The New Mexico Judicial Standards Commission filed a petition for discipline alleging Vincent violated the New Mexico Code of Judicial Conduct, including:
  - Rule 21-700(A)(3)(b) (the “endorsement clause”), which prohibited a judge from publicly endorsing or opposing a candidate for public office through the news media or in campaign literature; and
  - Rule 21-200(B), which barred a judge from lending the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of others.
- Vincent admitted that he publicly endorsed a candidate for public office but argued that disciplining him would violate the First Amendment because the endorsement clause was unconstitutional, relying on *Republican Party of Minnesota v. White*.

## Issues

1. Whether Rule 21-700(A)(3)(b)’s prohibition on a judge publicly endorsing or opposing a candidate for public office through the news media or in campaign literature violates the First Amendment, particularly after *Republican Party of Minnesota v. White*.
2. If the endorsement clause is constitutional, whether Vincent’s conduct violated the Code and warranted discipline.

## Decision

- The New Mexico Supreme Court held the endorsement clause constitutional under the First Amendment.
- The court determined the State’s interests in judicial impartiality, judicial independence, and the appearance of impartiality justified restricting judges from publicly endorsing candidates.
- The court concluded the endorsement clause was narrowly drawn because it targeted public candidate endorsements (through the news media or campaign materials), rather than restricting broader discussion of public issues.
- The court found Vincent’s conduct fell within the endorsement clause because he authorized a newspaper endorsement for a candidate for public office.
- The court adopted the Judicial Standards Commission’s recommendation and issued a formal reprimand to Vincent.

## Legal Principles

- A state may impose limits on certain political activity and speech by sitting judges to protect judicial independence, impartiality, and public confidence in the courts.
- A judicial ethics rule barring judges from publicly endorsing or opposing candidates for public office can satisfy First Amendment scrutiny when the restriction is focused on candidate-endorsement conduct and is tied to maintaining public trust in judicial neutrality.
- *Republican Party of Minnesota v. White* (addressing restrictions on judicial candidates announcing views on disputed issues) does not automatically invalidate a state’s separate restriction on judges publicly endorsing other candidates.
- A judge violates an endorsement prohibition by authorizing publication of the judge’s name as a supporter of a candidate in a newspaper, even if the publication omits the judge’s official title.
- Public association of a judge’s name with a candidate’s campaign may also implicate rules against using the prestige of judicial office to assist another’s private interests.

## Conclusion

*In re Vincent* upheld New Mexico’s judicial ethics rule forbidding judges from publicly endorsing or opposing candidates through the news media or campaign literature, and the court formally reprimanded a magistrate judge who authorized use of his name in a newspaper endorsement for a mayoral candidate.


In re Vincent, 143 N.M. 56 (2007)