Attorney Todd Eagen is taking some criticism for his campaign, specifically that he’s been at it for too long.
Eagen has been accused in a formal complaint to the PA Bar Association of violating Canon 4, Rule 4.2(B) of the PA Code of Judicial Conduct.
The rule states that judicial candidates may not campaign or advocate for their candidacy until after the previous year’s Election Day.
In this case, Eagen would have to forgo identifying himself as a 2015 Commonwealth Court candidate until November 5, 2014.
Yet in July 2014 The Bradford Era quoted Eagen at an Elk County Democratic picnic.
“We need a (Democratic) voice on the Commonwealth Court. We need a voice to strike down legislation such as voter ID,” Eagen said. “We need a voice to stand up for working men and women and I can be that voice and with your help and the help of Democrats across this Commonwealth we can do the right thing next year, we can get two Supreme Court spots. We can get that Superior Court spot and we can get that Commonwealth Court spot in the right hands — the hands of the people that have the same values of you and I. The Democratic values that we were raised on. My name is Todd Eagen and I’m going to be running for Commonwealth Court in 2015.”
An August 17th article in the Indiana Gazette also described Eagen as “a candidate for Commonwealth Court judge in 2015”.
Last summer, he attended and sponsored a luncheon for the Women’s Democratic Club of Delaware County.
Finally, after the election he described his 2014 activities to Borys Krawczeniuk of the Times-Tribune.
“Since February, Mr. Eagen said, he has visited county Democratic dinners, picnics and other functions in 44 of the state’s 67 counties,” Krawczeniuk wrote.
Eagen, however, feels that his 2014 activities were not in any way unique or different from his opponents.
“The canons allow you to, if you’re considering a run, to reach out to party leaders about a future run,” he said. “I don’t consider that a violation of any judicial canon.”
He went on to reveal that he and his opponent Michael Wojcik both discussed the fact that they were considering a run in April 2014.
“Other judicial candidates attended functions and talked about a run,” Eagen concluded.
Loading ...
15 Responses
Spoke to people at state committee:
1) heard that the complaint came from some lawyer in Philly and Marty did not have a hand in it
2) Eagan claimed that he was misquoted.
3) no one seemed to know what if any penalty there was.
I know Todd and Marty. I believe Todd is a great candidate for Judge. Marty is a campaigner but unless you have definite proof that he reported Todd to the Bar Association you not only slander Marty but the candidates he represents at the present time. That being said I question the timing of this article on the same day as Pa. State Committee begins.
This is a pretty underhanded campaign tactic and my guess would be Marty Marks has something to do with it. He has a reputation, well earned in my opinion, of pulling this kind of stunts in the past. Its amazing to me that he continues to get candidates with his poor campaign record and questionable personal decisions. StrongDem is correct in mentioning Marty’s past interactions with women on previous campaigns. It is well known in SWPA.
I would love to know who made the complaint. It might influence my vote tomorrow.
A reporter’s inference is not a transcript. I was present at some of the events cited in this article. Like Roger, I have found Todd to be very careful in what he says.
Complaints like this only come from opponents who have been outworked, and as this stunt shows, outclassed.
Todd came to our county -twice- and NEVER said he intended to run or that he was a candidate. That someone would take from the visit that he “might” run is understandable, but the fact is he was crystal clear that he wasn’t sure and was learning about the various county committees. When I introduced him to people the same distinction was made consistently.
Todd Eagen is a good man and someone is playing a good game here. He will have my vote this weekend at State Committee.
CHAPTER 33. CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
Rule 4.2. Political and Campaign Activities of Judicial Candidates in Public Elections.
(B) A candidate for elective judicial office may, unless prohibited by law, and not earlier than immediately after the General Election in the year prior to the calendar year in which a person may become a candidate for such office:
(1) establish a campaign committee pursuant to the provisions of Rule 4.4;
(2) speak on behalf of his or her candidacy through any medium, including but not limited to advertisements, websites, or other campaign literature;
(3) publicly endorse or speak on behalf of, or publicly oppose or speak in opposition to, candidates for the same judicial office for which he or she is a judicial candidate, or publicly endorse or speak on behalf of candidates for any other elective judicial office appearing on the same ballot;
(4) attend or purchase tickets for dinners or other events sponsored by a political organization or a candidate for public office;
(5) seek, accept, or use endorsements from any person or organization;
(6) contribute to a political organization or candidate for public office;
PLEASE READ Republican Party of Minn. v. White
536 U.S. 765 (2002). THE FIRST AMENDMENT APPLIES TO JUDICIAL ELECTIONS. THESE ARBITRARY RULES CAN’T HOLD UP JUDIICAIL SCRUTINY
If Wojcik authorized this stunt, he doesn’t have the character to be a judge. Eagen has my vote.
StrongDem-
Those are strong words and accusations. Besides being hit on, do you have any basis for Marty being behind this?
The quotes are taken from news publications. So, the question is whether or not these statements constitute a violation of the rules. The rules do not indicate the penalty for violation.
Forming a campaign committee and accepting donations is a pretty bright line. Restrictions on telling people you are planning to run for office don’t make sense.
What if Eagen announced a planned run back in August, but never filed because he changed his mind? Would that still be a violation, if he never became a candidate?
If all the other candidates have attended functions and/or made similar statements, then there won’t be anyone on any ticket.
This is total BS. This is Marty Marks. He has no ethics or scruples. He is working for Donohue for Supreme (Pittsburgh), Debow for Superior (Philly) and Wodjik for Commonwealth (Pittsburgh). if anything, he should be investigated to ethics violations – but this is politics, right? He is slimy and dirty and whores himself out to anyone. He is offensive to women and hits on every woman he can, including me. He should be run out of the state.
Todd is a good man who has worked hard and played by all the rules. He deserves better than this. I hope he wins in Hershey. He has my vote.
Despite what this article implies, Todd’s outreach to his party over the past few months will help him in Hershey. It’s funny that a new candidate emerges for this race after petition signing starts and then this. What’s up???
It’s a 10 year term for a position that you have to campaign statewide for and the PA Bar Association says you can only start laying the ground work for a campaign 3 months before you have to circulate petitions statewide.
There is a lot of corruption going on in PA, but this isn’t an example of it.
Yes who filed it? That’s an important part of this story, but you’re not bothering to report it?
Interesting this comes up right before the State Committee endorsement meeting–just enough time for the voters to see it, not enough time to get it cleared up.
Who filed the charges?