The New York Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics has issued an opinion clarifying the ethical boundaries for judges making charitable donations. This guidance comes in response to inquiries from judges regarding their participation in charitable activities and the implications of public recognition for such donations.
The committee, which serves approximately 3,600 judges across New York State, interprets the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct. This includes providing advice on how judges can engage in charitable work without compromising their impartiality or the integrity of the judicial system. The committee is co-chaired by Honorable Debra L. Givens and Honorable Lillian Wan, both experienced judges in New York’s judiciary.
In the recent opinion, the committee addressed a scenario where several judges planned to make a joint charitable donation to local hospitals. They intended to use their personal funds to purchase medical supplies and personally deliver them to the hospitals. The judges expressed a desire to be publicly acknowledged by the hospitals for their contributions, including participating in tours and taking photographs with hospital staff.
The committee reaffirmed that judges must avoid any appearance of impropriety and act to uphold public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity. Their judicial responsibilities take precedence over other activities. Judges are permitted to engage in extrajudicial activities provided these do not undermine their capacity to act impartially or detract from the dignity of their judicial office.
According to the opinion, judges may make charitable donations in their own names and are allowed to be publicly recognized for these contributions. They can permit the charitable organization to use their names and titles for acknowledgment purposes. This aligns with previous opinions which support the notion that judges can identify themselves when making donations.
The committee confirmed that the judges in question could participate in various hospital-organized events, such as thank-you events and media engagements concerning their donations. However, they must ensure that any photography taken in courthouses complies with administrative approvals and does not interfere with judicial duties.
Furthermore, the opinion stated that judges should exercise caution regarding publicity related to their charitable activities. The committee emphasized the importance of self-restraint to maintain public confidence in the judiciary, stating that actions perceived as self-promotion, especially during election campaigns, must be avoided.
Regarding potential conflicts of interest, the committee indicated that judges typically do not need to recuse themselves or disclose charitable donations when hospitals appear in their courtrooms. Most donations are considered modest and not essential to the charity’s operations, thus not questioning a judge’s impartiality.
Overall, the advisory opinion provides a framework for judges wishing to engage in charitable activities while ensuring compliance with judicial conduct rules. The committee encourages judges to remain mindful of their roles and the potential implications of their public actions, ensuring that their contributions do not compromise the integrity of the judicial system.
