State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Opinion 93-10

Question

May a judicial officer appear as a member of a committee for a workshop to encourage woman to run for office? May the judicial officer appear on a panel at the workshop to share his/her experience in running for judicial office? Does it make a difference if the workshop's focus is on nonpartisan (city council) positions? Does it make a difference if other elected officials will speak about partisan positions?

May a judicial officer participate in a comedy contest which limits participants to people in law related professions? Does it make a difference if the judicial officer is not introduced as a judge? Does it matter if the judicial officer has remained an active member of the State Bar Association; may he/she be introduced as a lawyer or as a member of the bar? Does it make a difference if the purpose of the contest in to improve the image of lawyers?

May a judicial officer offer items to a charity auction? Does it matter if the judicial officer's name is not associated in any way? Does it matter if the item is listed as an anonymous donation? May a judicial officer work in his/her organization of a charity auction as long as the judge does not participate in any public solicitation for auction items? For instance, may the judicial officer work on committees like decoration, inventory of donated items, set-up, etc?

Answer

CJC Canon 5(A) provides that judges may engage in the arts, and other social and recreational activities, if such avocational activities do not detract from the dignity of their office or interfere with the performance of their judicial duties. CJC Canon 5(B) provides that judges may participate in civic and charitable activities that do not reflect adversely upon their impartiality or interfere with the performance of their judicial duties. CJC Canon 5(B)(2) states that judges may not solicit funds for any educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization, or use or permit the use of their office for that purpose. It also provides that judges should not be a speaker or the guest of honor at an organization's fund raising events, but judges may attend such events.

The Code of Judicial Conduct does not prohibit a judicial officer from appearing as a member of a committee for a workshop to encourage women to run for office. A judicial officer may appear on a panel at the workshop to share his/her experiences in running for judicial office. It does not matter if the workshop's forum is on non-partisan positions or if other elected officials will speak about partisan positions.

The Code of Judicial Conduct does not prohibit a judicial officer from participating in a comedy contest for people in law related professions. CJC Canon 5(A) provides that judicial officers may engage in social and recreational activities, if such activities do not detract from the dignity of their office or interfere with the performance of their judicial duties. The way in which the judicial officer is introduced or the purpose of the contest alone should not control whether a judicial officer should participate unless they would detract from the dignity of the office or interfere with the performance of their judicial duties.
CJC Canon 5(B)(2) permits a judicial officer to offer items to a charity auction. A judicial officer may not participate in solicitation for fund-raising, either directly or indirectly. However, the judicial officer may assist in ways that do not promote attendance at the event or promote donations. Therefore, the judicial officer's name should not be associated in any way with a charity auction and an item donated by a judicial officer should not be attributed to the judicial officer. A judicial officer may work on committees that do not participate in fund-raising activities or assist in efforts in any way which appear to be a public endorsement of the solicitation.

NOTE: Effective June 23, 1995, the Supreme Court amended the Code of Judicial Conduct. In addition to reviewing the ethics advisory opinions, the following should be noted:

Opinion 93-10—The language in CJC Canon 5(B)(2) has been modified.

The Supreme Court adopted a new Code of Judicial Conduct effective January 1, 2011. In addition to reviewing the ethics advisory opinions, the following should be noted:

CJC 3.1
CJC 3.7
CJC 3.7(B)

Opinion 93-10

04/09/1993

 

Privacy and Disclaimer NoticesSitemap

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

S3