Hmmm. You tell me.

On the one hand, we have Honorable James Nelson, Justice of the Montana Supreme Court. He recently appeared at a pro-choice rally with Democrat Senate candidate, John Tester. At the rally, he made a number of criticisms, clearly directed at President Bush's Republican administration, including references to the Justice Departments subpoenas of internet search records and the phony wiretap scandal.

"Nelson said the government has spent trillions of dollars on so-called wars such as efforts against illegal drugs and illegal immigration, and on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Some of that money might be better spent fighting such problems as poverty, unemployment and poor daycare options for working Americans, he suggested."

On the other hand, we have the Montana Canons of Judicial Ethics. For example, we have Canon 5, Essential Conduct: "A judge should be...impartial..."

Or, perhaps one might consider Canon 28, Partisan Politics: "While entitled to entertain his personal views of political questions, and while not required to surrender his rights or opinions as a citizen, it is inevitable that suspicion of being warped by political bias will attach to a judge who becomes the active promotor of the interests of one political party as against another. He should avoid making political speeches, making or soliciting payments of assessments or contributions to party funds, the public endorsement of candidates for political office and participation in party conventions."

And, finally, to give you an idea just how high the standard is, one should consider Canon 4, Appearance of Impropriety: "A judge's official conduct should be free from impropriety and the appearance of impropriety..."

You tell me. What do you think?