In American Civil Liberties Union v. The Florida Bar, 999 F.2d 1486 , 1490 (11th Cir. 1993) (ACLU), the Court considered the case of a judicial candidate who sought to make truthful remarks regarding his opponent, the incumbent circuit judge. The candidate was concerned that his statements might violate a canon of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct as the Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) of the Supreme Court of Florida had interpreted and enforced it. Thus, the candidate sought from the Committee on Standards of Conduct Governing Judges (Committee on Standards) an advisory opinion as to whether his proposed speech would violate the canon. The Committee on Standards opined that the candidates proposed speech would violate the canon at issue. At about the same time, another judicial candidate procured an injunction against the operation of the canon in question as to that particular individual. The ACLU judicial candidate plaintiff then asked the JQC whether it would enforce the canon against him, but the JQC refused to render an opinion. The judicial candidate then filed suit, claiming that the canon violated his First Amendment rights. Upon receiving the lawsuit, the Florida Bar retreated, arguing that its reading of the canon in question would not prohibit the judicial candidate from making his proposed speech. While the Bar conceded that a declaratory judgment would be appropriate in view of the fact that the Committee on Standards had issued an adverse advisory opinion, it nonetheless argued that, under the circumstances, no preliminary injunction was necessary. The Eleventh Circuit noted that, in the face of a mootness challenge premised on nonenforcement of an allegedly unconstitutional provision, there must be some possibility that the defendants will seek to enforce the challenged regulation. ACLU, 999 F.2d at 1494.