Opinion 25-96

June 26, 2025

Digest:  A full-time judge may serve on the advisory board of a bar association’s Justice Center, where the entity is unlikely to appear in any court and does not accept court referrals.

Rules:   22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.4(A)(1)-(3); 100.4(C)(3); 100.4(C)(3)(a)(i)-(ii); Opinions 20-212; 17-39; 14-159; 09-244.

Opinion:

          A full-time judge asks if he/she may serve on the advisory board of a bar association’s Justice Center.  The entity’s mission “is to combine the resources, position and membership of the [bar association] with those in academia, the bench and the bar, and to partner with non-lawyer community leaders and groups to identify and understand legal and social justice issues, promote access to justice, and act as a catalyst for meaningful improvement in, and a positive perception of, the administration of justice in New York State.”  We understand from the inquiry that the Justice Center is not likely to be involved in litigation in any court.

          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]).  A judge’s extra-judicial activities must be compatible with judicial office and must 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]).  A judge generally may serve as “an officer, director, trustee or non-legal advisor” of an organization devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3]).  However, a judge may not so serve if the entity will likely “be engaged in proceedings that ordinarily would come before the judge” (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][a][i]) or, in the case of a full-time judge, is likely to “be engaged regularly in adversary proceedings in any court” (22 NYCRR 100.4[C][3][a][ii]).

We have said judicial participation in bar associations and other such legal organizations “is to be encouraged” (Opinion 14-159 [citations omitted]).  Moreover, a judge may be involved in efforts to improve the law, the legal system or the administration of justice, subject to generally applicable limitations on judicial speech and conduct.  Thus, for example, we concluded a judge may be involved in public debate regarding the need for a constitutional convention to reform the New York judiciary (see Opinion 09-244).  We also said a full-time judge may serve on the board of a non-profit, non-partisan organization that advises governmental policymakers nationwide on criminal justice measures affecting public safety, where the organization does not engage in litigation, is unlikely to appear in the judge’s court, and the judge will not have the opportunity to make referrals to the entity (see Opinion 17-39).  In reaching this conclusion, we explained (id. [citations and footnote omitted]):

Allowing judges to take part in community affairs is of benefit to the public.  Thus, we have advised that a full-time judge may serve as a member of the Advisory Board of the National Center for Judicial Security, which recommends court security measures; on a legislator’s advisory board developing policies concerning abuse of certain illegal drugs; as a member of a state-sponsored justice advisory group developing state-wide policies in a certain area of the law; as a member of a committee of a national association facilitating the training of drug court judges; on a local prevention partnership board affiliated with community and governmental agencies involved in the prevention of juvenile delinquency; and on a public university’s advisory board discussing criminal justice issues.

Conversely, we have advised that a full-time judge may not serve on the advisory board of the Center for Court Innovation, given that the Center regularly provides program alternatives to detention and incarceration for criminal defendants and is engaged regularly in adversary proceedings in some courts (see Opinion 20-212).

          On the facts presented, the bar association’s Justice Center is unlikely to appear in any court and does not accept court referrals.  Moreover, it seeks to improve the legal system and the administration of justice.  Accordingly, we conclude the inquiring judge may serve as a member of the Justice Center’s advisory board, subject to generally applicable limitations.