Opinion 26-10
February 5, 2026
Digest: A judge who is currently within his/her window period for election or re-election for judicial office may participate as a panelist in a mental health awareness forum at the Annual Legislative Conference of the New York State Association of Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic, and Asian Legislators in Albany, where the forum is sponsored by a not-for-profit entity, is designed to increase community awareness, and is not a fund-raiser.
Rules: 22 NYCRR 100.0(Q); 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.3(A); 100.3(B)(8); 100.4(A)(1)-(3); 100.4(C)(3)(b)(ii); 100.5(A)(1); 100.5(A)(1)(g); 100.5(A)(2)-(4); Opinions 24-60; 22-180; 20-44; 20-41; 19-73; 12-74; 09-79.
Opinion:
The inquiring judge is currently in his/her window period for election or re-election to judicial office. He/she has been invited to participate in a mental health awareness forum which will take place at the Annual Legislative Conference of the New York State Association of Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic, and Asian Legislators (NYSABPRHAL) in Albany. The forum is organized by a not-for-profit organization that assists individuals in obtaining employment, and the panelists “will speak directly to the importance of centering mental health so that we can show up grounded, focused, and empowered not only for ourselves, but for the communities we serve.” The panel members, including the judge, were “selected because of [their] unique lived experiences, leadership, and impact within our communities.” The event is not a fund-raiser.
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”]).
Ordinarily, a judge may not attend NYSABPRHAL’s annual legislative conference, even for a non-political purpose such as chaperoning public students on a field trip (see e.g. Opinions 24-60; 20-41). In Opinion 24-60, however, we called attention to the fact that the inquiring judge was not in his/her window period for political activity as an announced candidate for election or re-election to judicial office. Here, as the inquiring judge is in his/her window period, we have the opportunity to consider the inverse question. We conclude that a judge who is an announced candidate within his/her window period for election to a known judicial vacancy may attend NYSABPRHAL’s annual legislative conference, subject to generally applicable limitations on campaign speech and conduct (see e.g. 22 NYCRR 100.5[A][2]-[4]).
Because we conclude that the inquiring judge, as a judicial candidate in his/her window period, may attend the conference, we now turn to the permissibility of participating in this particular forum. We have recognized that the community benefits from having judges take an active part in community affairs whenever possible. Indeed, absent special factors creating an appearance of impropriety, we have said a judge may speak at a variety of events focusing on issues of interest to the community, such as the impact of mental health issues on our courts (see Opinion 22-180); prevention of elder abuse (see Opinion 20-44); preventing and reducing underage drinking (see Opinion 12-74); discouraging driving while intoxicated and the use of illegal drugs (see Opinion 09-79); and preventing homelessness (see Opinion 19-73). We have cautioned that a judge may not comment on “pending or impending” proceedings in any court within the United States or its territories (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[B][8]); may not participate in law enforcement or prosecution-oriented presentations; and may not manifest a predisposition in deciding issues or cases (see e.g. Opinions 12-74; 09-79).
Here, the forum is sponsored by a not-for-profit organization and is not a fund-raiser (see e.g. Opinions 19-73; 22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][b][ii] [judge may not be “a speaker” at an organization’s fund-raising events]). The subject matter of the forum, i.e. increasing mental health awareness, is not unduly controversial or one-sided. As the forum appears to be primarily educational in nature and is unlikely to cast reasonable doubt on the judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge or otherwise interfere with proper performance of judicial duties, we see no bar to the judge’s participation.
In sum, we conclude that a judge who is currently within his/her window period for election or re-election for judicial office may participate as a panelist in a mental health awareness forum at the NYSABPRHAL’s Annual Legislative Conference in Albany, where the forum is sponsored by a not-for-profit entity, is designed to increase community awareness, and is not a fund-raiser.