2012-12 (June 1, 2012)
Website; Name, Use of
Rules 1.2, 1.3, 2.10, 2.11 & 3.1
Issue:
May a Judicial Official maintain a personal
webpage on which the Judicial Official’s
biographical information, articles, books, courses,
talks and lectures are listed? The webpage would
be accessible
primarily through one or more websites maintained by
academic institutions at which the Judicial Official
teaches or independently. If it is permissible for
the Judicial Official to maintain a personal
webpage, may the webpage contain (a) information
identifying the Judicial Official’s judicial status
and (b) links to the websites of publishers of the
Judicial Official’s writings and to online book
sellers such as Amazon.com where the Judicial
Official’s books are described and sold?
Applicable Rules:
Rule 1.2 of Code states that a judge “should act
at all times in a manner that promotes public
confidence in the … impartiality of the judiciary,
and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of
impropriety.
The test for appearance of impropriety is whether
the conduct would create in reasonable minds a
perception that the judge violated this Code or
engaged in other conduct that reflects adversely on
the judge’s honesty, impartiality, temperament, or
fitness to serve as a judge.”
Rule 1.3 of the Code states that a judge “shall not use or attempt to use
the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests
of the judge or others or allow others to do so.”
Rule 2.10 of the Code prohibits judges from making any public statement “that might reasonably
be expected to affect the outcome or to impair the fairness of a matter pending or impending in
any court or make any non-public statement that might substantially interfere with a fair trial
or hearing.”
Rule 2.11 of the Code requires disqualification of a judge in “any proceeding in which the judge’s
impartiality might reasonably be questioned including, but not limited to, the following circumstances…
(4) The judge has made a public statement, other than in a court proceeding, judicial decision, or opinion
that commits or appears to commit the judge to reach a particular result or rule in a particular way in
the proceeding or controversy.”
Rule 3.1 of the Code concerns extrajudicial activities and sets forth general limitations on such activities,
such as not using court premises, staff or resources, except for incidental use or for activities that concern
the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice unless otherwise permitted by law and not participating
in activities that (1) interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties, (2) lead to frequent
disqualification, (3) appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge’s independence, integrity or
impartiality, or (4) appear to a reasonable person to be coercive.
Response:
Based upon the information provided, the
Committee concluded that
the Judicial Official may maintain a personal
webpage, accessible through an academic
institution’s website or independently, which
contains biographical information, identifies the
Judicial Official’s judicial status, and lists the
Judicial Official’s articles, books, courses, talks
and lectures, subject to the following conditions:
(1) the Judicial Official should retain the right to review and pre-approve the use of
any biographical information about the Judicial Official listed on any personal webpage
(see Rule 1.3);
(2) the Judicial Official should ensure that the personal webpage does not include comments about any
pending or impending matters (see Rule 2.10);
(3) the Judicial Official should ensure that the personal webpage does not contain content which would
cast doubt on the Judicial Official’s impartiality or otherwise reflect any predisposition in particular
cases (see Rules 2.11(a), 3.1(3)); and
(4) the Judicial Official monitors the webpage to ensure that it does not link to commercial or advocacy
group websites, including links to commercial websites for the primary purpose of selling books. Because a
book may be sold by numerous vendors, a link to a single or select vendor such as Amazon.com could raise
questions concerning preferential treatment of vendors. It is, however, permissible for the Judicial Official
webpage to include a link to a publisher’s website, specifically to a publisher’s webpages that describe the
Judicial Official’s books or other writings. In general, the Judicial Official should exercise caution in
choosing website links because of the potential that such choices could be perceived as an endorsement of
the contents and/or owner of such other website.