The Florida Supreme Court issued a written reprimand Thursday to one retired Miami-Dade Circuit judge and four others on the bench over their endorsement of a nonprofit organization vying for a contract with the Florida Department of Children and Families worth about $500 million.

The ruling follows a finding from the Judicial Qualifications Commission that former Judge Cindy Lederman and current Miami-Dade Circuit Judges Marcia Caballero, Rosa Figarola, Teresa Pooler and Mavel Ruiz violated canons one, two and four of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which govern integrity, impartiality and "quasi-judicial activities."

Lederman wrote the letter in September 2018, when the DCF was considering whether Our Kids of Miami-Dade and Monroe Inc. or Citrus Health Network should receive a five-year contract that would make them the "lead agency for community-based care for the southern region of Florida-Dade and Monroe Counties," according to the opinion.

The letter endorsed Our Kids, the prior recipient of the contract, and triggered a Miami Herald article titled, "Alleged conflicts of interest roil $500 million child welfare fight."

The letter included signatures from Caballero, Figarola, Pooler and Ruiz, and said, "We have worked with Our Kids and we have complete faith only in the Our Kids model of leadership. When you select the agency please keep our voices in mind."

That encouragement crossed the line of impartiality, according to Thursday's opinion, which conceded there was no evidence the letter affected DCF's deliberations. Citrus Network landed the contract in April 2019.

The ruling approved the judges' stipulation with the JQC, in which they admitted wrongdoing and Lederman acknowledged that her letter "went too far."

"This case highlights just how important it is for judges to consider whether their actions could create the appearance of impropriety," said Alex Williams, general counsel to the JQC.

The justices agreed with the JQC's recommendation of a written reprimand, finding the letter wasn't sent to further the judges' own interests, and noting that they accepted responsibility and had "otherwise unblemished" disciplinary records.

However, the ruling implied Lederman might have received harsher discipline if she was still on the bench.

"We emphasize though, with respect to Judge Lederman's distinct role in generating the letter and recruiting other judges to support it, this court has consistently held that such misconduct warrants a public reprimand," the opinion said. "However, in light of Judge Lederman's retirement, this court approves the stipulated discipline of a written reprimand."

Lederman was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1979 and served more than 20 years on the bench before retiring in December 2018.

Read the ruling:

More discipline stories: Florida Judge Reprimanded for Losing Temper, Insulting Defendant Sex in Exchange for Legal Services? Miami Lawyer Arrested on Bribery Charges