During almost any hotly contested election, qualifications for an office can become an issue.
Some say that's become true in the race for Cole County's Division 4 circuit judge, between incumbent Patricia Joyce, a Democrat, and challenger Brian Stumpe, a Republican.
Incumbent Circuit Judge Dan Green also is on Tuesday's ballot, seeking re-election to the Cole County Division 2 seat. Since he has no opposition, his re-election bid has been overshadowed greatly by the Stumpe-Joyce contest.
All three candidates meet the basic constitutional and legal requirements to be a judge:
• The Missouri Constitution says: "Circuit judges shall have been citizens of the United States for at least ten years, and qualified voters of this state three years (before) their selection, and be not less than 30 years of age and residents of the circuit for at least one year."
• The Constitution also requires all judges in Missouri to "be licensed to practice law in this state."
The state Supreme Court's "Code of Judicial Conduct" makes some other demands on all Missouri judges:
• The first canon of that code says: "A Judge Shall Uphold and Promote the Independence, Integrity and Impartiality of the Judiciary, and Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety."
That includes complying with state laws and with the Code of Judicial Conduct.
• Additionally, the code requires a judge to "act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, and (to) avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety."
A commentary on that rule explains: "Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules or provisions of this code.
"The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality, and appropriate temperament is impaired."
And that gets into territory that has been challenged in the election campaign, because of campaign contributions.
The Washington, D.C.-based Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC), through its Missouri Political Action Committee, and the Jefferson City-based Adam Smith Foundation have mailed advertising cards questioning Joyce's ability to be impartial with any attorney who's contributed to her campaign.
One of the RSLC's mailers said: "Joyce sits on the judicial ethics committee but she receives the majority of her campaign funds from lawyers. Several of whom practice in front of her. Even her own campaign treasurer is a lawyer."
The Supreme Court's Code of Judicial Ethics does not prohibit judges or judicial candidates from taking those campaign donations.
The code says the candidates "shall not solicit or accept campaign funds in a courthouse or on courthouse grounds (nor) solicit in person campaign funds from persons likely to appear before the judge."
However, it adds: "A candidate may make a written campaign solicitation for campaign funds of any person or group, including any ... likely to appear before the judge."
According to Joyce's campaign finance reports filed with the Missouri Ethics Commission (www.mec.mo.gov), she raised a total of $107,164.33 through Oct. 30 - and spent $84,099.80 through that same day.
Of that, just over half the contributions - $54,0002.26 - came from more than 102 individual lawyers and 48 firms, with 58 of the individuals and nine of the firms in Mid-Missouri.
U.S. Supreme Court rulings have said lawyers have a First Amendment right to contribute to whomever they choose.
James Harris - a Jefferson City lobbyist, member of the Adam Smith Foundation and a spokesman for the group Missourians for Open and Accountable Judicial Selection (which previously used the name "Better Courts For Missouri") - told the News Tribune last month: "It is highly inappropriate for Judge Joyce to accept contributions from lawyers who regularly appear before her court. ...
"Individuals may feel that they are at a disadvantage if they walk into Judge Joyce's courtroom and are facing a lawyer who is one of her political supporters."
During interviews last week, both Joyce and Stumpe noted that attorneys can ask for another judge, if they're concerned about getting a fair hearing.
In a news release last week, Doerhoff noted the Joyce campaign had received contributions "from approximately 350 individual sources, with an average contribution of $243."
In that release, Doerhoff again raised the issue of Stumpe's taking a large contribution from the national RSLC.
Stumpe's campaign finance reports show him raising a total of $119,539.83 through Oct. 27 and spending $108,019.34 of that income.
Of that, $100,000 was contributed by the national Republican group whose spokeswoman, Jill Bader, said last month the goal is "to elect down ballot, state-level justices across the country whose backgrounds and philosophies best reflect the will of the voters."
Though opponents question the potential influence of a large donation, Stumpe's taking the $100,000 didn't violate any laws.
Joyce supporters have complained that contributors to the RSLC aren't known to voters before election day, but Bader and Stumpe both noted the RSLC has thousands of donors from around the nation. Bader added: "We neither accept nor provide earmarked funds."
Stumpe's campaign finance reports show him receiving a total of $2,000 from five individual lawyers and two law firms.
He noted $100 of that came from a friend who practices estate law in the state of California and, obviously, won't be practicing in Missouri.
Stumpe also received a $5,000 donation from retired Jefferson City businessman Clyde Lear.