Opinion 24-60

March 14, 2024

Digest:  A judge who is not in his/her window period for election or re-election to judicial office may not attend an otherwise impermissible legislative caucus weekend, even as a volunteer chaperone for students.

Rules:   22 NYCRR 100.0(Q); 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.3(A); 100.4(A)(1)-(3); 100.5(A)(1); 100.5(A)(1)(g); Opinions 23-200; 20-41; 19-129; 04-27; 97-152.

Opinion:

          A judge asks if it is ethically permissible to chaperone a group of public school students to a “legislative caucus weekend” in Albany, notwithstanding that three prior advisory opinions prohibit attendance (see Opinions 20-41; 04-27; 97-152).  As chaperone, the judge would supervise the students at the location, be present in conference rooms where elected officials address the students on civic engagement and career choices, arrange meals, and oversee the students’ one-night hotel stay.  The judge would not attend any other functions at the conference.  The judge asks if he/she may “participate within this limited capacity” as a chaperone, outside his/her window period for election or re-election to judicial office.

          A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]).  A judge’s judicial duties “take precedence” over all the judge’s other activities (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[A]).  Thus, a judge’s extra-judicial activities must be compatible with judicial office and must not cast doubt upon the judge’s impartiality, detract from the dignity of judicial office, or interfere with proper performance of the judge’s duties (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[A][1]-[3]).  Moreover, a judge may not “directly or indirectly engage in any political activity” unless an exception applies (22 NYCRR 100.5[A][1]).  Outside the applicable window period, for example, a judge must not attend “political gatherings” (22 NYCRR 100.5[A][1][g]; see 22 NYCRR 100.0[Q] [defining “window period”]). 

          Applying these rules, we have opined that a judge may not attend a “Legislative Weekend” in Albany organized by the New York State Black and Puerto Rican Legislative caucus, where the activities thereat are legislative and political (see Opinion 97-152), nor a three-day “Task Force Conference” in Albany organized by a caucus of state legislators, because the programs are of a legislative and political nature (see Opinion 04-27).  We also said a judge may not attend the annual legislative conference weekend of the New York State Association of Black and Puerto Rican Legislators Inc. in Albany (see Opinion 20-41).  As we explained (id. [footnote omitted]): 

Despite NYSABPRL’s stated non-political and non-partisan purposes, we believe its annual conference is undoubtedly a legislative gathering. The event is hosted exclusively by the NYSABPRL, whose members and leadership are all elected state legislators.  The conference is dedicated to discussions and information on legislative budget access and the process. Indeed, it includes at least one political caucus-hosted meeting and multiple legislator-hosted networking events and issues workshops.  Several conference sessions are designed to spark debate about issues that may be before the state legislature for review.  Participation by a judge would give the impression that the judge is directly or indirectly engaging in a political process, advocacy and/or providing opinions on legislative topics.

Even in carving out a narrow exception to permit “the chief judicial officer of the Unified Court System” to represent the judiciary’s interests by speaking at one “specific session focused on the judiciary’s operational needs and/or experience with respect to developing technologies” (Opinion 23-200), we reiterated that “other judges still may not ‘attend or participate’ in this conference” (id. [emphasis added]).

          Nor does the apparently non-partisan purpose of attendance in the limited role of a chaperone alter this result.  We have advised that a judge who is not in their window period for election may not participate in an event sponsored by a political organization, even as part of an ongoing effort to “introduce children to civic engagement” by arranging meetings with elected officials and touring government workplaces and facilities (Opinion 19-129). 

          Accordingly, we conclude the inquiring judge may not attend the legislative caucus weekend conference, even in the limited role of student chaperone to apparently non-partisan events.