Brooklyn judicial candidates and judges are facing renewed scrutiny over political donations to Democratic Party organizations.
According to a report by the New York Post, records show that former Brooklyn Democratic Party chairman Frank Seddio, current chair Rodneyse Bichotte-Hermelyn and affiliated political clubs collected about $190,000 from more than 90 judges and judicial candidates since 2012.
The report examines whether payments from judicial candidates to political organizations complied with New York rules governing judicial campaign activity.
Critics cited in the report questioned whether these financial relationships could affect party endorsements or public confidence in judicial elections. Seddio and Bichotte-Hermelyn denied that donations influenced judicial endorsements.
New York Rules Limit Judicial Campaign Activity
New York’s judicial conduct rules place limits on political activity by sitting judges and judicial candidates.
Under Section 100.5 of the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct, judges generally cannot make political contributions, attend political gatherings or purchase tickets to politically sponsored events outside permitted circumstances.
Judicial candidates have a defined “window period” during which certain campaign activities are allowed.
New York Courts explains that this period generally begins nine months before a relevant primary, judicial nominating convention, caucus or party meeting. It can extend for six months after the election or nominating event, depending on the circumstances.
During this period, candidates may purchase up to two tickets to politically sponsored dinners or functions, subject to applicable cost limits.
The rules also prohibit judicial candidates from personally soliciting or accepting campaign contributions. Fundraising must instead be handled through a campaign committee.
The New York Post report questioned whether some candidates’ repeated declarations of candidacy could allow them to remain within a window period and continue participating in political events.
That is an allegation raised by critics. It is not an established finding that the practice violates the rules.
What Judicial Candidates Need to Know
For anyone considering a judicial campaign in New York, the situation shows why campaign finance and judicial ethics rules require careful attention.
Judicial candidates operate under restrictions that do not apply in the same way to candidates for legislative or executive office.
Candidates should understand when their window period begins and ends. They should also know which political activities are permitted and which fundraising responsibilities must be handled through a campaign committee.
New York Courts advises judicial candidates to seek guidance on campaign-related ethics questions. Candidates should also consult the appropriate election and campaign finance authorities about disclosure and contribution requirements.
For first-time candidates, careful recordkeeping is especially important.
A judicial campaign requires attention to more than ballot access and voter outreach. Candidates also need to follow the separate ethical rules that apply to judicial campaigns.
The scrutiny in Brooklyn shows how campaign finance, party endorsements and judicial ethics can intersect in NYC-area elections.
Understanding these rules before participating in political events or making campaign-related payments can help candidates identify potential compliance issues early.
Related Reading
Generally, no. New York’s judicial conduct rules prohibit judicial candidates from making political contributions, subject to specific rules governing their own campaigns and permitted activities.
It is a defined period when judicial candidates may engage in limited political activity, generally beginning nine months before a relevant nominating event and extending beyond the election under specified circumstances.
