02/25/2026
Rebuttal to Alisa R. Lancaster’s Claims of Judicial Ethics Violations
Alisa Lancaster’s post accuses judicial candidates Maureen Harrod, Lee Harrod, Holly Meyer, and Thomas Kendrick of serious ethics violations for accepting donations from Republican committees. She claims this breaches Rule 4.2(5) of the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct, erodes impartiality, and threatens public trust in the judiciary.
This is flatly incorrect—and the law proves it.
The Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission Advisory Opinion No. 2015-03 explicitly states that a judicial candidate’s campaign committee may accept contributions from partisan political organizations, including county committees and their PACs, provided the candidate does not personally solicit them.
This is reaffirmed in the official 2025 Arkansas Judicial Elections Guide, which guides candidates on compliant practices. The Code (Rule 4.2 and related provisions) bars personal solicitation, direct endorsements, or conduct implying bias—but it permits these committee-level donations with built-in safeguards to protect impartiality.
These donations—disclosed publicly on the Arkansas Secretary of State’s website—are modest, fully compliant, and routine. No ethics complaints have been filed over them because there is no violation.
Partisan support for judicial candidates has been normal in Arkansas for decades.
Even after nonpartisan elections began with Amendment 80 (2000), county committees and state parties have openly contributed to judicial races—including Supreme Court contests—across both parties. This isn’t a sudden “problem”; it’s standard practice. Lancaster’s selective outrage ignores history and flips a legal norm into a scandal only when it benefits certain candidates.
This attack isn’t about principle—it’s partisan politics disguised as ethics.
Lancaster’s own public activity shows strong support for Democratic candidates (e.g., Chris Jones for Congress, Alex Holladay for state office) and alignment with anti-Republican narratives. Her post fits a pattern of coordinated smears targeting Republican-backed judicial hopefuls, twisting half-truths to undermine qualified candidates. Highlighting family ties or local connections? Irrelevant red herrings—no law forbids them, and full disclosure prevents hidden influence.
The real threat to our judiciary is exactly this kind of toxic smear campaign.
It erodes public confidence far more than transparent, legal donations ever could. True corruption hides in shadows or floods from special interests—not in disclosed county support that follows the rules. These candidates’ finances are clean, public, and above board.
I proudly support Maureen Harrod, Lee Harrod, Holly Meyer, and Thomas Kendrick. They deserve fair consideration based on qualifications, not baseless fearmongering.
Don’t let smears become truth.
Demand facts over fiction. Protect Arkansas’s judiciary from insider attacks, special-interest games, and real corruption—not from compliant, lawful campaign support. Our courts—and our liberties—depend on it.
Copied from Abranda Stephens
