I was trying to remember the requirements for forming a campaign committee while running for a judicial office, because I know it is a necessity to receive donations, but there are some things I didn't realize (or that only apply to higher judicial office, and not MDJs.) I just came upon a judicial ethics committee FAQ that had me laughing. I think the false sense of judicial impartiality we try to fake by rules and canons is a joke whose only purpose is remove judges the Man or some other affronted public official doesn't like, for a non-administration-of-justice related reason, but here is what amused me:

http://ethics.pacourts.us/electionfaq.htm

34. May I comment on hot button issues such as abortion, gun rights and death penalty issues?

The general principle is that one may make statements or announcements about personal views but may not make pledges or promises directly or inferentially about decision making. A candidate is prohibited from making commitments with respect to cases, controversies or issues that are likely to come before the Court. You should be aware that if you do announce your views on a particular issue, you may have to recuse yourself from deciding that issue should it come before you. You should keep in mind that as a judge your duty is to decide cases, and avoid knowingly putting yourself in a position that invites recusal. The test would be whether a reasonable person looking at the totality of the statement would believe that the candidate has specifically undertaken to reach or is committed to a particular end result.

I can only assume that means if you say that you promise, or even mention that it is your personal view that judges ought, to obey, defend, and support the US and PA constitutions, including the 2A and the Art. I, Sec. 21, that you'll ultimately be removed from office for doing so (but probably only if you piss off someone important. Like a police officer or prosecutor, or a person before your court who a public official is particular fond of...)