Las Vegas, NV
September 19, 2024
Don’t be hypocrites. All unions should pull the Endorsement of Joe Siscento and Madeline “Leavitt” Cole just like Culinary Local 226 and Hispanics In Politics did in the 2022 election!
A photo posted on social media by SEIU Nevada features nonpartisan judicial candidates at an event for Republican gubernatorial candidate Joe Lombardo.
In a troubling revelation, two judicial figures—sitting judge Joe Sciscento and aspiring judge Madeline “Leavitt” Cole—have broken a fundamental rule that governs judicial conduct. Both candidates violate Rule 4.1(A)(7), a provision in the judicial code of ethics that prohibits judges and judicial candidates from “seeking, accepting, or using endorsements or publicly stated support from a political organization,” unless expressly permitted by law.
This rule is clear, yet it’s shocking how many candidates overlook or blatantly disregard it during their campaigns.
The judicial system relies on the integrity and impartiality of its judges. Rule 4.1(A)(7) exists to preserve that integrity by ensuring that judicial candidates remain independent from political organizations, preventing any appearance of partisanship.
It is meant to protect the judiciary from political influences that could compromise the fairness and objectivity expected from the bench. When judges like Sciscento and Cole disregard this rule, it raises serious questions about their commitment to upholding the laws they are meant to enforce.
Ethics complaints have already been filed against Sciscento and Cole, signaling that this breach of conduct will not go unnoticed. The complaints remind us that judicial candidates must be held to the highest accountability standards, just like any other public official. Those who seek to wear the robe should exemplify the rule of law—not break it.
The clear and straightforward nature of Rule 4.1(A)(7) makes this violation even more concerning. It is not an obscure or complicated provision; it is a well-known rule that all judicial candidates are expected to follow. For Sciscento, an experienced sitting judge, and Cole, an aspiring judge, to ignore this rule shows either a flagrant disregard for judicial ethics or a profound misunderstanding of their responsibilities as candidates.
The consequences of allowing judges to accept partisan endorsements are far-reaching. When the public perceives that political organizations influence judges, it undermines the foundation of a fair and impartial judiciary. Voters should demand that those who wish to serve in the judiciary respect the laws and ethical guidelines that ensure that justice is administered fairly and without bias.
As voters, we must remain vigilant and elect judges who adhere to the rule of law—not those who break it. Sciscento and Cole demonstrated through their actions that they are willing to bend or ignore the rules when they suit their political ambitions. This should give voters pause. The integrity of our judicial system is too important to be left in the hands of those who cannot follow the rules themselves.
In the upcoming elections, let’s hold all judicial candidates accountable and elect individuals who will uphold the highest standards of ethics and integrity. The judiciary must remain impartial and independent, free from political influence. Sciscento and Cole’s actions have shown that they are not candidates for this role.
