Opinion 23-145

December 14, 2023

Digest:  A part-time judge may “ghostwrite” a not-for-profit organization’s fund-raising letters and grant applications that will be signed, submitted and circulated by others without crediting the judge, provided the judge does not personally solicit funds, does not permit the use of the prestige of judicial office for fund-raising, and does not permit his/her name to appear as the author or signatory on any fund-raising solicitations or grant applications.

Rules:   22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.4(C)(3); 100.4(C)(3)(a)(i); 100.4(C)(3)(b)(i), (iv); Opinions 23-118; 23-11; 13-87; 12-14.

Opinion:     

          The inquiring part-time judge volunteers with a local church and historical museum, both of which are not-for-profit organizations located outside the jurisdiction of the judge’s court.  The judge asks if it is ethically permissible to draft fund-raising letters and grant applications for these entities, including letters to church congregants requesting a contribution toward church operational needs, where the judge will not personally sign or circulate the letters, and the judge’s name will not be associated with either organization’s fund-raising initiatives. 

          A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and must always act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]).  A part-time judge generally may serve as an officer, director, trustee or non-legal advisor of a not-for-profit educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3]), provided the entity is unlikely to be engaged in “proceedings that ordinarily would come before the judge” (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][a][i]).  A judge, whether as a member or otherwise, “may assist such an organization in planning fund-raising” (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][i]), although the judge must not “personally participate in the solicitation of funds or other fund-raising activities” (id.) and must not “use or permit the use” of judicial prestige for fund-raising or membership solicitation (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][iv]). 

          The core question here is whether anonymously ghostwriting grant applications and fund-raising letters to be signed, submitted and circulated by others constitutes permissible “assist[ance] … in planning fund-raising” or impermissible “personal[] participat[ion] in the solicitation of funds” (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][i]).  As our opinions implicitly recognize, charitable fund-raising is an area where the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct authorize some uncredited behind-the-scenes involvement (see e.g. Opinion 13-87 [a judge may “provide names of individuals for the organization to invite to [its fund-raising] event and may identify contacts who may be interested in a fund-raising leadership role, provided the judge instructs the organization not to use or refer to the judge’s name in the solicitation”]).  Thus, for example, where a judge was the president of a not-for-profit sports boosters organization, we said the judge may “assist the organization with planning fund-raising,” provided the judge does not personally solicit funds, does not permit the use of judicial prestige for fund-raising, and “does not permit his/her name to appear as the author on any fund-raising letter or as spokesperson in other solicitations” (Opinion 12-14 [emphasis added]).  We also said that a part-time judge may volunteer at a not-for-profit fire company as a grant-writer, but “must not participate or lend their name to any fund-raising activity” (see Opinion 23-11).  More recently, we advised that a full-time judge, as administrator of a not-for-profit food pantry, “may prepare the pantry’s funding applications, but may not personally sign them” (Opinion 23-118).  We emphasized that the judge “must instead designate someone else from within the organization to sign the applications” (id.).

          Here, the judge’s proposed role with respect to fund-raising will be limited to ghostwriting fund-raising letters and grant applications.  The judge will not be identified as the author of any letter soliciting donations and will not sign the letters.  We conclude that it is ethically permissible for the inquiring judge to serve as an uncredited volunteer ghostwriter of fund-raising letters and grant applications for the church and museum, provided the judge does not personally solicit funds, does not permit the use of the prestige of judicial office for fund-raising, and does not permit his/her name to appear as the author on any fund-raising solicitations or grant applications (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][i], [iv]; Opinions 23-118; 23-11; 12-14).