[1] The Kansas Code of Judicial Conduct consists of four Canons, numbered Rules under each Canon, and Comments that generally follow and explain each Rule. Scope and Terminology sections provide authoritative guidance in interpreting and applying the Code. An Application section establishes when the various Rules apply to a judge or judicial candidate.[2] The Canons state general principles of judicial ethics that all judges must observe. [3] The Rules of the Kansas Code of Judicial Conduct are rules of reason that should be applied consistent with constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules, and decisional law, and with due regard for all relevant circumstances. The Rules should not be interpreted to impinge upon the essential independence of judges in making judicial decisions. [4] The Comments that accompany the Rules serve two functions. First, they provide authoritative guidance regarding the purpose, meaning, and proper application of the Rules. They contain explanatory material and, in some instances, provide examples of permitted or prohibited conduct. Comments neither add to nor subtract from the binding obligations set forth in the Rules. Second, the Comments identify aspirational goals for judges. To implement fully the principles of this Code as articulated in the Canons, judges should strive to exceed the standards of conduct established by the Rules, holding themselves to the highest ethical standards and seeking to achieve those aspirational goals, thereby enhancing the dignity of the judicial office.[5] When this Code uses "shall" or "shall not," binding obligations are imposed, the violation of which can result in disciplinary action. When "should" or "should not" is used, the text is cautionary and a statement of what is or is not appropriate conduct but not a binding rule under which a judge may be disciplined. "May" denotes permissible discretion or, depending on the context, action that is not covered by specific proscriptions. [6] Although the black letter of the Canons and Rules is binding and enforceable, it is not contemplated that every transgression will result in the imposition of discipline. Whether discipline should be imposed should be determined through a reasonable and reasoned application of the Canons and Rules, and should depend upon factors such as the seriousness of the transgression, the facts and circumstances that existed at the time of the transgression, the extent of any pattern of improper activity, whether there have been previous violations, and the effect of the improper activity upon the judicial system or others. [7] The Code is not designed or intended as a basis for civil or criminal liability. Neither is it intended to be the basis for litigants to seek collateral remedies against each other or to obtain tactical advantages in proceedings before a court. Kan. R. Rel. Jud. Cond. Scope