Opinion 26-65/26-66

March 26, 2026

Digest:  A judge may hire as a summer intern a law student who will receive a stipend from a private law firm for any public service internship that summer, provided the judge (1) insulates the intern from any cases in which the law firm appears and (2) discloses the insulation and the basis for it.  Assuming the judge concludes, in his/her sole discretion, that he/she can be fair and impartial in matters involving the law firm, the judge may preside after such insulation and disclosure.

Rules:   Judiciary Law § 14; 22 NYRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.2(B); 100.3(C)(2); 100.3(E)(1); Opinions 25-24; 22-181; 15-14; 13-80.

Opinion:

          Two judges ask similar questions about hiring a first-year law student for a summer internship.  In both inquiries, the student has been accepted into a private law firm’s “accelerated” recruitment program, in which the firm offers students a regular paid internship in 2027 and a $25,000 stipend for an internship elsewhere in summer 2026.  In Inquiry 26-65, the stipend requires the student to “secure an internship in a non-profit organization, District Attorney’s Office, Legal Aid Society or similar or the courts.”  In Inquiry 26-66, the stipend will cover internships with “a company or organization aligned with [the firm’s] industries of focus” as well as public service internships with “a public interest or nonprofit organization, or a government or academic institution.”  One judge has a single case with the sponsoring law firm; the other has none.  Each judge is prepared to insulate the proposed intern from any cases involving the sponsoring law firm.

          A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and must always promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]).  A judge must not allow family, social, political, or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[B]) and must require the judge’s staff to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the judge (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[C][2]).  Further, the judge must disqualify from any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality “might reasonably be questioned” (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[E][1]), including where expressly required by rule or law (see e.g. Judiciary Law § 14).

          Ordinarily the “decision whether to engage a student intern is within the discretion of the judge and does not generally raise ethical concerns” (Opinion 25-24).  Here, the question presented is whether a trial court judge may hire a law student for a summer internship, given that a law firm has hired the law student for a paid summer internship the following summer and has offered the law student a $25,000 stipend as an incentive for taking a public service internship this summer.  In our view, it is significant that the stipend is not targeted specifically to a judicial internship, but would apply equally to other public service internships or even, potentially, internships with for-profit entities aligned with the law firm’s practice areas.

          In Opinion 22-181, we said that a trial court judge may hire a law student for a judicial internship for academic credit “while the student is simultaneously employed part-time in a non-legal paid position at an investment bank which has cases before the judge.”  Moreover, we said that, assuming the judge can be fair and impartial, “the judge may still preside in cases involving the bank, but must disclose to the parties the student’s relationship with the bank and insulate the student from those cases” (id.; see also Opinions 15-14; 13-80).  In our view, the same principles apply here.

          Accordingly, the inquiring judges may hire the law student interns, provided they insulate the interns from any cases in which the sponsoring law firm appears and disclose the insulation and the basis for it.  Assuming the judge can be fair and impartial in matters involving the law firm, which is a matter left to the judge’s sole discretion, the judge may preside after insulation and disclosure.  The obligation to disclose ends when the judicial internship ends.