A group that wants North Dakota judge candidates to answer questions about abortion, homosexuality and school prayer is suing to block judicial conduct rules that it says prevent the candidates from replying.

The North Dakota Family Alliance filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Fargo, its director, Christine Rondeau, said Monday. The group contends some of North Dakota's judicial conduct rules are unconstitutional because they infringe on the free-speech rights of judges and attorneys who are running for judgeships.

The lawsuit names 34 defendants, including members of North Dakota's Judicial Conduct Commission and the state Bar Association's inquiry committee, which investigates alleged infractions of rules that govern the conduct of lawyers.

In telephone and e-mail interviews on Monday, defendants in the lawsuit either declined comment or said they were unaware of the filing.

The lawsuit is being handled by a Terre Haute, Ind., law firm that successfully represented the Minnesota Republican Party two years ago in a U.S. Supreme Court dispute over judicial speech. The high court's ruling in the case, called Republican Party v. White, gave candidates for judicial office more leeway to discuss issues during campaigns.

An attorney in the Minnesota case, James Bopp Jr., said North Dakota did not change its judicial conduct rules in response to the Supreme Court's decision. As a result, judge candidates could be disciplined for making statements that the high court's ruling allows, Bopp said.

Rondeau said the Family Alliance wanted to encourage candidates to respond to a questionnaire it sent to judge candidates. The organization wants to use the information to publish a voters' guide, she said.

Fifteen state district judgeships are on North Dakota's ballot this fall. Five judgeships are contested, including three in Cass County, one in Grand Forks County and one in Ward County.

"We're not asking (judge candidates) to make commitments, or pledges, or promises," Rondeau said. "What we are simply asking is that they be allowed to share their basic legal and political philosophy with the voters."

The survey has eight questions. It asks prospective judges whether they believe the North Dakota Constitution recognizes a right to abortion and homosexual relationships; whether prayer over loudspeakers at school athletic events is unconstitutional; and their opinions about whether a judge may display the Ten Commandments in his or her courtroom.

The questionnaire also lists a number of civic and advocacy groups, and asks candidates to indicate whether they have supported any of them. The groups span the political spectrum, ranging from the AFL-CIO to the Christian Coalition, the National Rifle Association and the Sierra Club.

Bopp said he helped to draft the questions, so candidates could respond without running afoul of the judicial-speech guidelines he said were outlined in the Supreme Court decision.

For example, judges may say they oppose abortion rights, but may not say how they would decide a specific case about abortion, Bopp said.

"We know they have opinions. We know that those opinions influence them," Bopp said. "Since the voters have the responsibility of picking which candidate to vote for, then it's helpful to voters to know those opinions."