State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Opinion 15-02

15-02

STATE OF WASHINGTON

ETHICS OPINION 15-02

Question

What are the duties and obligations of a Judge when the Judge learns that a court employee owns a medical marijuana business? As far as the Judge has been able to ascertain, the business is in full compliance with Washington state laws and regulations. Federal law, of course, prohibits the possession, sale, and distribution of medical marijuana. The business and the Court are located in different cities, but in the same county.

Answer

CJC 1.1 provides that a judge must comply with the law and the Code of Judicial Conduct. Although "law" is defined in the Terminology section of the Code as encompassing court rules as well as statutes, constitutional provisions, and decisional law, the Code does not limit the term to only state law. Thus, judges must also comply with federal law.

CJC 1.2 provides in part that a judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary.

CJC 3.1 provides, in part, that a judge may engage in extrajudicial activities, except as prohibited by law. Also, CJC 3.11(C)(4) prohibits a judge's involvement in any business entity when it would result in a violation of the Code.

CJC 2.12(A) provides that a judge shall require court staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge's direction and control to act with fidelity and in a diligent manner consistent with the judge's obligations under the Code. The Code is silent as to the definition of the phrase "to act with fidelity and in a diligent manner consistent with the judge's obligations under the Code." A review of existing decisions from this and other states provide limited guidance as to the scope of that phrase. The requirement could be interpreted along a spectrum from narrow to broad.

A narrow interpretation would include only those activities occurring while the court employee is actually discharging employment duties. However, past opinions have not limited the scope of its application in this way. (See Opinions 00-04, 01-01, and 02-23). When a staff person's extra-curricular conduct implicates violations of other provisions of the Code, past opinions have restricted those activities. A broad interpretation could include every facet of a court employee's work and personal life. However, there is no provision in the CJC that applies the Code directly to all court employees subject to the judge's direction and control. Neither a narrow nor broad interpretation is appropriate; rather, CJC 2.12(A) should be interpreted as recognizing that some activities of court employees outside of the discharge of their employment duties may be within the purview of CJC 2.12(A).

In the circumstance presented, even if owning a medical marijuana business may comply with the state statutory scheme, possessing, growing, and distributing marijuana remains illegal under federal law for both recreational and medical use. See Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. ยงยง 801-904. Although the Code does not generally prohibit a court employee from engaging in outside businesses or employment, operating a business in knowing violation of law undermines the public's confidence in the integrity of the judiciary in violation of CJC 1.2, and is contrary to acting with fidelity and in a diligent manner consistent with the judge's obligations under the Code.

Opinion 15-02

07/20/2015

 

Privacy and Disclaimer NoticesSitemap

© Copyright 2024. Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts.

S3