May a judge write local lawyers asking them to support a legal aid program?

Plain-English summary

A circuit judge proposed a personal letter to local bar members describing financial shortfalls at Legal Aid and asking attorneys to contact the office to offer help. He would use plain paper, his home return address, his own postage, and no judicial title.

The Commission regarded the proposed request as at least partly aimed at raising funds or services. It found that a letter from the judge to lawyers in the local bar would call his impartiality into question, regardless of whether Legal Aid was classified as a civic charity under Canon 5B or a legal-system organization under Canon 4. It therefore rejected the proposed letter.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2000, after the Alabama Supreme Court's 1975 adoption of the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics. Subsequent amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Canons and linked opinion before relying on its conclusions.

Common questions

Q: Did omitting the judicial title make the letter permissible?

A: No. The Commission rejected the letter despite its plain stationery and lack of title.

Q: Did the letter have to ask expressly for money?

A: No. The Commission found that a request to offer assistance sought funds or services to offset Legal Aid's funding reduction.

Background and rules framework

The Commission considered Alabama Canons 4 and 4C on legal-system activity and Canons 5, 5B(1), and 5B(2) on civic activity and fundraising. Its holding rested on the impartiality question created by soliciting local lawyers.

Citations and references

The opinion cites Alabama Canons 4, 4C, 5, 5B(1), and 5B(2), and Advisory Opinions 87-293 and 00-747.

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 01-773: Scouting Fundraiser Letter

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions

• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 00-768

• Canon history: Alabama JIC, Canons of Judicial Ethics

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION
DATE ISSUED: DECEMBER 20, 2000 ADVISORY OPINION 00-768
WRITING A LETTER REQUESTING
S U P P O R T F O R L E G A L A I D
ORGANIZATION
ISSUES
Mayajudgewriteaproposedlettertomembers
of the local bar association soliciting support
forthelocalLegalAidprogram? Answer: No.
FACTS
A circuit judge proposes sending a letter to
membersofthelocal barassociationsoliciting
support for the local Legal Aid program. The
letterwouldbeonplainpaperinaplainenvelope
thatuseSthejudge’shomeaddressasthereturn
address. The judge would not use his judicial
title; he would sign the letter as an individual,
and he would personally pay the postage. The
letter would inform attorneys that, due to level
funding and inflation, financial resources for
Legal Aid had been cut in half over the past
twentyyears. Statingthattheexistingsituation
at the local Legal Aid office threatens the
conceptofequaljusticeunderthelaw,thejudge
would ask the attorneys to include Legal Aid
in their thoughts and prayers, and to telephone
the Legal Aid office to offer assistance.
DISCUSSION
Althoughtheproposedletterdoesnotexpressly
ask for a financial contribution, at least one of
the objectives of the letter clearly is to raise
funds and/or services to offset a reduction in
public funding for the local Legal Aid office.
In considering the judge’s inquiry, the
Commission has studied Canons4and5ofthe
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics.
Canon 4 provides that, subject to proper
performance of judicial duties, a judge may
engage in certain quasi-judicial activities if, in
so doing,hedoesnotcast doubtonhis capacity
to decide impartially any issue that may come
beforehim. Quasi-judicialactivitiespermitted
underCanon4includeassistinganorganization
“devotedtotheimprovementofthelaw,thelegal
system,ortheadministrationofjustice”toraise
funds. Canon 4C also states that a judge “may
make recommendations to public and private
fund-grantingagenciesonprojectsandprograms
concerning the law, the legal system, and the
administration of justice.”
Canon5permitsajudgeto participatein“civic
and charitable activities that do not reflect
adverselyuponhisimpartialityorinterferewith
the performance of his judicial duties.” In
addressingleadershipcapacitieswithcivicand
charitableorganizations,Canon5B(1)statesthat
a judge should not so serve “if it is likely that
the organization or institution will be engaged
inproceedingsthatwouldordinarilycomebefore
him or will be regularly engaged in adversary
proceedings in anycourt.” Canon 5B(2)states
thatitis“desirablethatajudgenotsolicitfunds
for any educational, religious, charitable,
fraternal,orcivicorganization, oruseorpermit
the use of the prestige of his office for that
purpose.”
B As the Commission has previously
stated,Canon5B(2)stronglydiscourages
but does not absolutely prohibit
participationinfundraisingforcivicand
charitable organizations. See, e.g.,
AdvisoryOpinions83-174and96-596.
Participation in fund raising presents a
danger that the prestige of the judicial
office will be used for the solicitation
ADVISORY OPINION 00-768
PAGE 2
of funds. Advisory Opinions 81-101
and 96-596. It also involves a danger
that the person solicited will feel
obligated to respond favorably if the
judge is in a position of influence or
control. CommentarytotheModelCode
of Judicial Conduct, Canon 4C(3)(b)
(1990). Ajudgewhoparticipatesinfund
raising for a civic or charitable
organization must be ever mindful of
the provisions of Canons 1 and 2, and
must limit such participation so that he
or she does not lend the prestige of his
or her judicial office to the event or
otherwiseviolateeithertheletterorthe
spirit of Canons 1 and 2. Advisory
Opinions 83-174, 83-179, 85-242, and
96-596.
Advisory Opinion 00-747.
In the opinion of the Commission, sending the
proposed letter to the members of the local bar
would create a question as to the judge’s
impartiality. See, Advisory Opinion 87-293.
Thus, sending the letter would be contrary to
theAlabamaCanonsofJudicialEthicsregardless
of whether the legal aid program is considered
a civic or charitable organization (Canon 5B),
or an organization dedicated to improvement
of the legal system and the administration of
justice (Canon 4).
REFERENCES
AlabamaAdvisoryOpinions87-293,and00-747.
AlabamaCanons of Judicial Ethics, Canons4,
4C, 5, 5B(1), and 5B(2).
This opinion is advisory only and is based on
the specific facts and questions submitted by
the judge who requested the opinion pursuant
to Rule 17 of the Rules of Procedure of the
Judicial Inquiry Commission. For further
information,youmaycontacttheJudicialInquiry
Commission, 800 South McDonough Street,
Suite 201, Montgomery, Alabama 36104; tel.:
(334) 242-4089; fax: (334) 240-3327; E-mail:
[email protected].