Georgia Supreme Court Candidates Take Campaign Speech Fight to U.S. Supreme Court

On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, Georgia Recorder reported that two Democratic-backed candidates for the state Supreme Court filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court. This action is the latest development in an ongoing lawsuit concerning their campaign rhetoric.

The candidates, former state Senator Jen Jordan and attorney Miracle Rankin, are seeking to overturn a ruling from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. This ruling sided with a state judicial ethics agency. Two Trump-appointed judges on the appeals court lifted a temporary order that had prevented the agency from releasing public statements about Jordan and Rankin’s campaign comments. A third judge, appointed by President Joe Biden, dissented from this decision.

Following the appeals court ruling, the Judicial Qualifications Commission issued two public statements, declaring that it “reasonably believes” Jordan and Rankin violated Georgia’s Code of Judicial Conduct. The commission specifically flagged the candidates’ joint campaign approach, noting that judicial candidates are generally prohibited from endorsing others. Additionally, the commission expressed disapproval of their participation in reproductive freedom events and their public statements indicating an intent to restore abortion rights.

The core of the dispute centers on the timing of the commission’s public statements. These statements were issued during a brief window between the federal appeals court’s decision and when U.S. District Court Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner of the Middle District of Georgia issued her final order to prevent the commission from releasing such statements.

Jordan and Rankin are challenging Republican-appointed state Supreme Court justices in a race that has attracted considerable attention from political figures across the spectrum, despite the seats being officially nonpartisan.

This situation echoes a similar process experienced by John Barrow, a former Democratic congressman, during his state Supreme Court campaign in 2024. Barrow’s campaign had also largely focused on protecting reproductive rights and faced scrutiny from the commission.

Lester Tate, an attorney representing Jordan and Rankin, and who also represented Barrow in 2024, stated that the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is intended to safeguard his clients’ First Amendment rights. Tate expressed that this is the second time he has represented Supreme Court candidates facing actions from the JQC aimed at limiting their First Amendment rights.

He emphasized the importance of taking this issue to the Supreme Court to ensure that candidates in future races are not subjected to similar restrictions on their speech. The legal team plans to fully litigate the matter to settle the issue for future judicial campaigns.