Battleground state's Supreme Court race sees bizarre last-minute ethics twist

A federal judge has blocked the body that oversees state judicial elections in Georgia from issuing ethics criticism against a pair of liberal state Supreme Court candidates, in a sudden new twist in the emerging drama in the race set to take place this week.

According to Atlanta News First, "In a temporary restraining order, U.S. Chief Judge Leslie A. Gardner said the Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) cannot issue a non-confidential 'public statement' about the allegations outlined in April notice letters to Jen Jordan and Miracle Rankin, finding that kind of late-campaign disclosure could chill protected political speech without meaningful constitutional review."

"The order leaves the underlying inquiry intact, setting up a high-stakes clash between Georgia’s judicial campaign rules and candidates’ ability to tell voters where they stand on issues likely to come before the court," said the report.

The ethics investigation faulted Jordan and Rankin for commenting on political issues that could come before the court, saying in an ad that they will "restore abortion rights" in Georgia. It also faulted them for appearing in an ad jointly, which would imply endorsements of each other and thus violate rules about judicial candidates making endorsements.

States that allow judicial elections have varying degrees of rules on what candidates can and can't say on the campaign trail, which often go beyond restrictions on candidates for strictly political office, although such rules are often controversial, and candidates seek to bend the rules when possible in an increasingly politicized environment.

Georgia Democrats are hoping Jordan and Rankin will oust a pair of Republican-backed incumbents. Many questions remain, however, including the existence of a bizarre loophole that would potentially let the GOP-backed judges cancel their opponents' election win if they are successful.