A Georgia judicial ethics panel has determined there is credible evidence that two Democrat-backed candidates for the states highest court crossed clear ethical lines in their campaigns against Republican-appointed justices.
According to Just The News, a special committee of the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission concluded it "reasonably believes" that former Democratic state Sen. Jen Jordan and personal injury attorney Miracle Rankin violated the Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct by actively supporting one anothers campaigns. The panel further found that Rankin and Jordan likely breached a separate rule barring judicial candidates from making public statements on issues likely to come before the courts when they appeared at an anti-abortion rally and declared they would back pro-abortion positions.
Both candidates have dismissed the findings as partisan warfare rather than principled oversight. They have chosen to attack my campaign because my message is resonating with voters that judges should serve all Georgians without fear or favor," Rankin told the Georgia Recorder newspaper, adding, "I trust that Georgians will see this for what it is and continue to exercise your right to elect who you would like to serve on your Supreme Court."
Former state GOP Chairman David Shafer said that once Rankin and Jordan learned two weeks ago that they were under investigation, they turned to the courts in an effort to shut the inquiry down. The case landed before Stacey Abramss sister, a federal judge appointed by President Obama, who temporarily blocked the commission from proceeding until an appeals court reversed her order this past weekend.
"This is a stunning abuse of the legal process by lawyers who are seeking to become judges impartial dispensers of justice," Shafer said, arguing that the episode underscores why judicial races must be held to the highest ethical standards. With the investigation now back on track, Georgia voters are left to weigh not only the candidates ideology on issues like abortion, but also their willingness to test the limits of judicial ethics in pursuit of power.
Login