Opinion 25-161
November 6, 2025
Digest: A full-time judge may be a keynote speaker at a free event honoring military veterans that is hosted by a local elected official in partnership with a commercial entity, where (1) the event is paid for with government funds and is unaffiliated with the legislator’s campaign committee or any other political organization; and (2) the judge’s name and image will not be used for commercial purposes. The judge may also be featured in materials distributed by the elected official announcing the event.
Rules: 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.2(C); 100.3(B)(8); 100.4(A)(1)-(3); 100.4(B); 100.4(C)(3)(b)(ii); 100.4(D)(3); 100.4(G); 100.5(A)(1); Opinions 25-64; 24-70; 23-122; 22-158; 17-117; 16-34; 12-187; 12-167; 12-49; 09-28.
Opinion:
The inquiring full-time judge has been invited to be a keynote speaker at a free, non-fund-raising event honoring local military veterans. The event is hosted by a local elected official in partnership with a cosmetics company, which will provide “free pampering services to veterans in attendance.” The event is being hosted with government funds, rather than campaign funds, and the official is not currently running for office. The judge asks if it is permissible to speak at the event about his/her own experiences as a veteran and service member, and whether the judge may permit the elected official to feature the judge’s photograph and title in materials promoting the event, such as “save the date” flyers.
A judge must avoid even the appearance of impropriety and act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2[A]). A judge may engage in extra-judicial activities that are compatible with judicial office and do not (1) cast reasonable doubt on the judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge; (2) detract from the dignity of judicial office; or (3) interfere with proper performance of judicial duties (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[A][1]-[3]). Thus, a judge may speak, write, lecture, and teach (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[B]), subject to generally applicable limitations. For example, a judge must abide by restrictions on “directly or indirectly engag[ing] in any political activity” (22 NYCRR 100.5[A][1]) or being “a speaker or the guest of honor at an organization’s fund-raising events” (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][ii]). A judge must not lend judicial prestige to advance private interests (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[C]) and a full-time judge may not be an “active participant” in any form of business enterprise organized for profit (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[D][3]).
We have advised that a judge may attend generic cultural/holiday celebrations hosted by elected public officials, where such events are free and open to the public and are paid for by state/government funds rather than campaign funds (see Opinions 25-64; 23-122). As we have noted, “the mere fact that [a cultural] event is hosted by an elected nonjudicial official does not render it an impermissible political gathering” (Opinion 25-64 [citations omitted]).
Here, as in those prior opinions, although the event is hosted by an elected official, it is not sponsored by or affiliated with the official’s campaign committee or any other political organization. Accordingly, we conclude that the judge’s proposed participation in the event does not create a reasonable perception that the judge is endorsing the hosting official or his/her policies (see Opinions 25-64 [judge may participate in judging a “hat contest/pageant” at a legislator’s cultural/holiday event]; 12-49 [judge may preside in a mock video arraignment for educational purposes at the County Executive’s official “State of the County” speech]).
The new wrinkle here is that the event is being sponsored in partnership with a cosmetics company whose products will be featured and used at the event, albeit at no cost to the participants. The propriety of a full-time judge’s proposed speaking engagement involving a commercial entity “is highly fact-specific” and involves consideration of the sponsorship and overall context of the event as well as the proposed topic (see Opinion 24-70). For example, we have advised that a full-time judge “may not be the keynote speaker, honoree or awards recipient at a for-profit awards banquet sponsored by a commercial legal publisher, but may attend the event” (Opinion 12-187). Conversely, we have advised that a judge may speak without compensation at a CLE program co-sponsored by a hospital and a for-profit corporation, provided the judge does not endorse or advance the interests of the corporate sponsor (see Opinion 12-167). In Opinion 22-158, we said a full-time judge may be a guest speaker discussing aspects of the judge’s life and career path at a for-profit company’s “employee only” event, where the company’s interests were unlikely to come before the judge and the judge’s name and image would not be used for commercial purposes. We have also advised that a full-time judge may participate as one of several panelists and mentors at a free luncheon for young people, sponsored by a commercial entity, “where the event’s philanthropic purposes are clear, the judge’s participation will not be used for promotional purposes, and the commercial sponsor has assured the judge in writing that no commercial activity whatsoever will take place at the event” (Opinion 16-34).
Here, we note that the cosmetics company’s involvement appears to focus on providing free goods and/or services to veteran attendees, rather than selling products or otherwise engaging in traditional commercial activity. In our view, the judge’s non-commercial participation in this single event, hosted by an elected official and co-sponsored with a cosmetics company, does not make the judge an “active participant” in the company’s business activities. Nor do we find that speaking at this event to honor veterans will impermissibly lend the prestige of judicial office to advance the interests of the cosmetics company (cf. Opinions 22-158; 16-34; 12-167). This is especially true if, as it seems from the inquiry, it is the sponsoring elected official who is promoting the event rather than the company.
Finally, the proposed topic, i.e. the judge’s own experience as a veteran and service member, is clearly permissible. Indeed, it seems very unlikely to verge into impermissible subject matter such as commenting on pending or impending cases (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[B][8]) or giving legal advice (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[G]).
We thus conclude that it is ethically permissible for the judge to be a keynote speaker at this non-fund-raising event and for the judge’s name and likeness to be used in materials distributed by the elected official announcing the event (see e.g. Opinions 17-117 [judge may permit a non-profit organization to advertise that the judge will be speaking at a non-fund-raising event]; 09-28 [judge may serve as master of ceremonies for Veterans Day and Memorial Day ceremonies, provided that no fund-raising occurs at these events]).