Opinion 25-133

September 10, 2025

Digest:  A judge may speak to an ethnic/culture affinity group, consisting of law enforcement officers, about the judge’s journey to the bench and the careers of others with the same background.

Rules:   22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.2(D); 100.4(A)(1)-(3); Opinions 22-75; 22-71; 20-131; 17-12; 15-133.

Opinion:

          The inquiring judge has been invited to speak at a cultural heritage celebration organized by a not-for-profit association of law enforcement officers who share the same ethnic/cultural affinity as the judge.  The event is not a fund-raiser, and attendees will include the association’s members and their families and friends.  The judge asks if he/she may speak at the event to share her/her journey to the bench and to discuss the differing career paths of other individuals with the same background.

          A judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2) and must always act to promote public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]).  In general, a judge may participate in extra-judicial activities that are compatible with judicial office and do not cast reasonable doubt on the judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge; detract from the dignity of judicial office; or interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties (see 22 NYCRR 100.4[A][1]-[3]).  

Judges may publicly discuss their professional and personal background and experience, subject to generally applicable limitations (see e.g. Opinions 22-75 [judge may accept an invitation to speak “about the judge’s experience as a member of a minority group” at a free community celebration of Pride month]; 17-12 [judge may speak at not-for-profit religious or educational organizations about his/her “background and experience in becoming a judge”]; 15-133 [judge may speak at a foreign consulate about their experience of becoming the first judge of a particular gender and ethnicity in a particular area]).

          We have advised that a judge who is a former prosecutor may speak to an ethnic/cultural affinity group, made up of employees at the prosecutor’s office, about “the judge’s experience as a prosecutor, the judge’s career path, and the court system’s adaptation to virtual operations” (Opinion 20-131).  An audience limited to a particular “ethnic/cultural affinity group” is not improper where the group does not practice invidious discrimination but instead seeks to “promote the professional development, recruitment, and retention of its members, ‘with no suggestion of exclusionary practices’” (id. [citation omitted]).  Here, too, we see no impropriety in the judge speaking to an association “dedicated to the preservation of religious, ethnic, cultural or other values of legitimate common interest to its members” (22 NYCRR 100.2[D]; see Opinion 20-131).

          Although the audience will largely consist of law enforcement officers and their family and friends, this likewise does not bar the judge’s participation given the proposed topic (see e.g. Opinions 22-71; 20-131).  “Indeed, so long as the judge takes ‘particular care that his/her topic will not compromise the judge’s apparent or actual impartiality and does not manifest a predisposition to decide a particular type or class of case a certain way,’ it may ‘benefit the public interest when an organization that is involved in litigating only one side of an issue is exposed to the type of broad and nuanced perspective that a judge can offer’” (Opinion 20-131 [citations omitted]).

          Therefore, we conclude that the inquiring judge may speak at this non-fund-raising cultural heritage celebration to discuss his/her journey to the bench and other career paths undertaken by those of the same background, subject to generally applicable limitations on judicial speech and conduct.