State of Washington

Ethics Advisory Committee

Questions:

A court's Diversity Equity & Inclusion committee organizes attendance at community events consistent with the principles that participating in extrajudicial activities provide opportunities for the community to learn about the court system, engage with judicial officers and court members, and explore services and career opportunities with the court. The court is committed to equality, equity, and ending systematic racism and bias, and engaging the diverse populations served by the court. Some of these events are hosted by non-governmental organizations and require entrance or "table fees." Many are affiliation events held by diverse community groups. Many events are simply civic events hosted by municipal governments.

1. May the court participate and pay the entrance fee from the court's budget for these non-governmental community events?

2. May the court participate and pay the entrance fee from the court's budget for the government-sponsored events?

3. May the court purchase, from the court's budget, novelty items printed with the court's logo and give those items away at these events?

4. May the court allow the public to take pictures next to a giant gavel with the court's name in the background, with or without a judge in the photo?

Answer:

Judicial officers, "may participate in activities sponsored by organizations or governmental entities concerned with the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice, and those sponsored by or on behalf of educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations not conducted for profit[.]" CJC Rule 3.7 and Comment [8]. At the same time, judicial officers, "shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary..." CJC Rule 1.2; CJC Rule 3.7, Comment [2]. Similarly, judicial officers should not abuse, or permit others to abuse, the prestige of judicial office for the personal or economic interests of themselves or others. CJC Rule 1.3.

Based on the provisions of the Code cited above, the responses to the questions submitted are:

1. Judicial officers may participate in community events sponsored by non-governmental organizations related to the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice. Judicial officers also may participate in community events sponsored by educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations not conducted for profit. CJC Rule 3.7. However, whether a specific event is appropriate is factually dependent.

   EAO 93-19 summarizes various rules, issues, and factors to consider when deciding whether to participate in a specific activity. The purpose of these factors is to promote public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary. Participating in a function is prohibited if the intended involvement will: 1) lend the prestige of the office to the organization; 2) create the impression the organization is in a special position to influence the decisions of the judicial officer; 3) necessitate substantial time so as to interfere with the judicial duties; or 4) could result in frequent affidavits of prejudice or recusals. EAO 93-19.

   Payment of an entrance or "table fee" may be appropriate if it is not a political contribution and does not undermine the judiciary's independence, integrity, or impartiality. See Matter of Stoker, 118 Wn.2d 782, 795-796, 827 P.2d 986 (1992) (a $65 payment made to a political party by a judge's reelection campaign committee [as opposed to a court's budget] to rent booth space at a county fair not a political contribution); CJC Rule 3.1(C); CJC Rule 4.1(A)(4). However, whether such entrance or table fees can be paid from the court's budget is a legal question beyond the scope of this Committee's authority. GR 10.

2. Similar to the answer to Question 1, judicial officers may participate in government-sponsored events related to the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice. CJC Rule 3.7; EAO 96-05. Again, whether such fees can be paid from the court's budget is a legal question beyond the scope of this Committee's authority. GR 10.

3. Judicial officers should promote public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary. CJC Rule 1.2. When participating in community activities for the purpose of promoting public confidence in the judiciary, judicial officers must act in a manner consistent with the Code. CJC Rule 1.2 Comment [6]. Judicial officers should not, "abuse the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interest of [judicial officers] or others, or allow others to do so." CJC Rule 1.3. A judicial officer should not participate in activities that would undermine their independence, integrity, or impartiality. CJC Rule 3.1(C). Further, a judicial officer should not, "make extrajudicial or personal use of court premises, staff, stationary, equipment, or other resources, except for incidental use permitted by law." CJC Rule 3.1(E).

   Court resources should not be used for extra-judicial purposes, "except for incidental uses permitted by law." CJC Rule 3.1(E). Thus, purchasing novelty items using the court's budget to give away at community sponsored events may raise both ethical and legal concerns. One potential legal concern is that use of the court's budget for the purchase of novelty items with the court's logo to give away might be an impermissible gift of state funds under Const. art 8, § 7 (applicable to counties, cities, towns, and other municipal corporations). Such legal concerns, however, are beyond the scope of this Committee's authority. GR 10.

   As for ethical concerns, whether the court can use its budget to purchase novelty items to give away depends on whether it is an incidental use of such funds permitted by law. Giving out nominally valued novelty items with the court's logo to attendees of community or government sponsored events would not necessarily violate the Code, depending on the specifics of the event and the circumstances under which the items are distributed. The focus is on whether the court's giving away of items is seen as advancing a judicial officer's personal or economic interests, or improperly leveraging judicial prestige. CJC Rule 1.3; see also EAO 87-04, EAO 20-01. Relevant factors to consider include, but are not limited to, whether the items are left at a table for any and all to take, whether the event promotes a particular partisan cause or a judicial officer's election, or whether the event involves fundraising.

4. Permitting photos with a gavel and the court's name in the background, with or without a judge, does not necessarily violate the Code of Judicial Conduct. See Matter of Keenan, 199 Wn.2d 87, 502 P.3d 1271 (2022). However, a judge shall not abuse the prestige of judicial office, nor allow others to do so. CJC Rule 1.3. Therefore, such photos should not be used for personal gain, fundraising, or promoting a business or cause. CJC Rule 1.3; EAO 97-01 (lending prestige of office to credit card company or charity); EAO 86-18 (donating a "day in court" is abuse of prestige of office).

Opinion 24-03

09/23/2024