confidence in the Virgin Islands judicial system and the role of this Court. But, since both the Special Master’s May 4, 2010 Recommendation and this Court’s July 16, 2010 Order were issued in the context of a motion for judgment of acquittal, while the December 22, 2010 Recommendation relates to the ultimate decision of whether Kendall should be adjudicated guilty or not guilty, this Court shall consider this issue anew without providing any deference to its prior July 16, 2010 Order. We agree with Kendall that “[a] judge does not surrender First Amendment rights upon becoming a member of the judiciary.” In re Sanders, 135 Wn.2d 175, 955 P.2d 369, 375 (1998). However, the pertinent issue in this case is not whether judges are generally ilkerson, 876 So.2d 1006, 1011 (Miss. 2004) (<HOLDING>); Matter of Hey, 192 W. Va. 221, 452 S.E.2d 24,
recognizing criticisms of public officials is at core of speech protected by first amendment holding judges letter to the editor advocating against gay rights constituted speech fully protected by the first amendment holding judges offensive comments made on television show fully protected by first amendment holding that statute reaching beyond purely commercial speech to chill fully protected speech can merit application of the overbreadth doctrine holding that first amendment principles preclude recovery under state law for damages caused by speech or other protected conduct