May an Alabama judge continue serving part-time as a law school's interim dean?

Plain-English summary

The recently appointed judge held a part-time interim deanship at a law school in the judge's circuit. The job included soliciting donations and finding internships or externships with local law firms and government offices. The law school had also appointed the dean to the Alabama Fair Ballot Commission.

The Commission classifies this deanship as an extrajudicial activity under Canon 5, rather than a quasi-judicial activity under Canon 4. Training future lawyers broadly relates to the legal system, but the described administrative, fundraising, and placement duties lack the direct connection to improving the law, legal system, or administration of justice that the opinion requires for Canon 4 treatment. It expressly does not limit a judge's ability to teach or speak about those subjects.

Canon 5B(2) describes fundraising for an educational institution as undesirable. The Commission says the judge's outreach to law firms and government agencies for student placements is prohibited under Canon 2C because lawyers in the judge's circuit could feel pressured and the outreach could appear to use judicial prestige for the school's benefit.

It also describes continuing to serve on the Fair Ballot Commission as undesirable under Canon 5G because that body addresses policy beyond improvement of the law or administration of justice. Taken together, the duties of the interim deanship would require activity inconsistent with the Canons. The Commission concludes that continuing as dean is prohibited under Canon 5B.

In practice

The opinion distinguishes teaching about law from the broader duties of an interim dean. Its conclusion rests on the position's required fundraising, outreach to local legal employers, and commission service, not on a general bar against law school teaching.

Common questions

Q: Did the Commission prohibit a judge from teaching at a law school?

A: No. Its footnote says the opinion should not limit speaking, writing, lecturing, or teaching about the law, legal system, and administration of justice under Canon 4A.

Q: Why does the interim deanship fall under Canon 5 rather than Canon 4?

A: The Commission says its fundraising and placement duties are too far removed from direct improvement of the law, legal system, or administration of justice to qualify as Canon 4 activities.

Q: What does the opinion say about soliciting student placements?

A: The Commission says the judge may not solicit law firms or government agencies for student internships or externships because that outreach could appear to use judicial prestige for the law school's interests.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Alabama Canons 4 and 5 to classify the activity, Canon 5B and 5B(2) to its civic and educational responsibilities, Canon 2C to the prestige concern, and Canon 5G to service on a governmental policy commission.

Citations and references

Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics:

• Canons 2C, 4, 4A, 5, 5B, 5B(2), and 5G.

Statutes:

• Alabama Code § 17-6-81, describing the Fair Ballot Commission's work.

See also

• AL Judicial Ethics Op. 25-970: Probate Judge on Mental Health Board
• NE Judicial Ethics Op. 95-2: Paid Law School Teaching

Source

• Landing page: Alabama JIC advisory opinions
• Original PDF: Advisory Opinion 25-967

Original opinion text

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

JUDICIAL INQUIRY COMMISSION
DATE ISSUED: JUNE 12, 2025 ADVISORY OPINION 25-967
CIVIC & CHARITABLE
ACTIVITIES: SERVING AS DEAN
OF A LAW SCHOOL
ISSUE
May a judge serve part-time as the
dean of a law school?
Answer: No.
FACTS
A recently-appointed judge holds
a part-time position as the interim
dean of a law school. The law school
is within the judicial circuit in which
the judge serves. As interim dean, the
judge is required to engage in a
variety of interactions across
different organizations including,
fundraising activities and networking
efforts to secure professional
development opportunities for
students (i.e., internships and
externships with local firms and
government offices). Additionally,
the dean serves on the Alabama Fair
Ballot Commission pursuant to an
appointment by the law school.
DISCUSSION
The first issue that must be
decided is whether serving part-time
as the dean of a law school would be
considered as a quasi-judicial activity
governed by Canon 4 or as any other
extra-judicial activity governed by
Canon 5. Canon 4 allows a judge,
subject to the proper performance of
1
This opinion should not be construed to
limit a judge’s ability to speak, write,
lecture, or teach on subjects concerning the
law, the legal system, and the
his or her judicial duties, to engage in
“quasi-judicial activities”—such as
teaching, speaking, writing,
consulting with executive and
legislative officials, and serving as a
member, officer, or director of an
organization or governmental
agency—to improve the law, the legal
system, or the administration of
justice, provided that the judge may
do so without reasonably casting
doubt on the judge’s impartiality to
decide any issue that may come
before him or her. Canon 5 allows a
judge to engage in many of those
same activities, with a few additional
restrictions and limitations, with
respect to “extrajudicial activities”
that are not focused on improving the
law, the legal system, or the
administration of justice.
It is the opinion of the
Commission that this would be an
extrajudicial activity governed by
Canon 5. As stated above, Canon 4
governs activities dedicated to the
specific purpose of “improv[ing] the
law, the legal system, and the
administration of justice.” While the
training of future lawyers is certainly
an important and laudable enterprise,
the circumstances presented here are
too far removed from the
improvement of the law, the legal
system, and the administration of
justice so as to fall under the blanket
of Canon 4.1
In defining the types of
administration of justice which are
specifically allowed under Canon 4A.
ADVISORY OPINION 25-967
PAGE 2
activities that may be considered
“quasi-judicial activities,” other
jursidictions have advised that these
activities must have a “direct, readily
articulable nexus” with “the courts’
core mission of . . . delivering
unbiased, effective justice to all and
their statutory and constitutional
responsibilities—in other words, how
the courts go about their business.”
See generally Cynthia Gray, Nexuses
and Tangents, 57 CT. REV. 120 (Am.
Judges Ass’n 2021) (internal
quotation marks and footnotes
omitted) (collecting and summarizing
opinions). In sum, “a concern with
justice in a broader sense is not
enough and[, thus,] activities with
[only] a tangential, incidental, partial
connection to the courts stay within
the code’s restrictions.” Id. Here, the
duties of the interim dean go far
beyond simply teaching or lecturing.
Rather, the interim dean must also
solicit funds for the law school and
cultivate new opportunities for
students of the law school. While
these duties broadly relate to the legal
system by providing for the training
of future lawyers, they do not present
a sufficient nexus to the law, the legal
system, or the administration of
justice so as to fall under Canon 4.
Therefore, the judge’s service as
interim dean is governed by Canon 5.
As stated above, Canon 5 governs
a judge’s extrajudicial activities.
Canon 5B, specifically, provides:
A judge may participate in
civic and charitable activities
that do not reflect adversely
upon his [or her] impartiality
or interfere with the
performance of his [or her]
judicial duties. A judge may
serve as an officer, director,
trustee, or nonlegal advisor of
an educational, religious,
charitable, fraternal, or civic
organization or institution not
conducted for the economic or
political advantage of its
members, subject to the
following limitations:
. . . .
(2) It is desirable that a
judge not solicit funds
for any educational,
religious, charitable,
fraternal, or civic
organization or
institution, or use or
permit the use of the
prestige of his [or her]
office for that purpose,
but he [or she] may be
listed as an officer,
director, or trustee of
such an organization or
institution.
When analyzed under the relevant
provisions of the Canons, it seems
that some of the actions that the judge
would undertake as dean of the law
school are undesirable or even
prohibited.
One of the primary duties of the
dean is to solicit funds on behalf of
the law school. Thus, the inquiring
judge would be responsible for
ADVISORY OPINION 25-967
PAGE 3
identifying potential donors and
soliciting and accepting funds for the
law school. This activity is strongly
discouraged because Canon 5B(2)
deems such activity by a judge to be
undesirable.
Additionally, it is the opinion of
the Commission that the judge may
not solicit law firms or government
agencies to provide internship or
externship opportunities for students
of the law school. Canon 2C generally
prohibits a judge from “lend[ing] the
prestige of his [or her] office to
advance the private interests of
others” in all of the judge’s activities.
The inquiring judge serves in the
judicial circuit in which the law
school is located. Thus, it can be
reasonably expected that much of the
judge’s outreach on behalf of the law
school in this regard would be to law
firms and government offices, e.g.,
the district attorney’s office, within
the judge’s own circuit. Though the
judge would be interacting with these
organizations as the interim dean of
the law school, the power dynamic
between judge and lawyer would still
be present in the background of those
interactions and could cause the
attorneys being solicited to feel
coerced or pressured into complying
with the judge’s request. This
presents an untenable appearance that
the prestige of the judge’s office,
even though unintentional, might be
used to advance the private interests
of the law school.
Lastly, it is undesirable for the
judge to serve on the Alabama Fair
Ballot Commission. Canon 5G
provides, in pertinent part, “It is
desirable that a judge should not
accept appointment to a governmental
committee, commission, or other
position that is concerned with issues
of fact or policy on matters other than
the improvement of the law, the legal
system, or the administration of
justice or unless required by law.”
The purpose of the Fair Ballot
Commission “is to provide to the
public a fair and accurate explanation
of what a vote for and what a vote
against a statewide ballot measure
represents.” Ala. Code § 17-6-
81(a)(1). The Fair Ballot Commission
is responsible for crafting “ballot
statements.” Id. at (b). Those ballot
statements are to include:
(1) The text of a statewide
ballot measure, including
sponsors, cosponsors, and the
text of the question that will
appear on the statewide ballot.
(2) A summary of and the text
of any implementing
legislation directly related to
the statewide ballot measure.
(3) The placement of the
statewide ballot measure on the
statewide ballot.
(4) A plain language summary
of the statewide ballot
measure, which shall include,
at a minimum, the legal or
constitutional authority for its
passage, the effect of the
statewide ballot measure if it is
ADVISORY OPINION 25-967
PAGE 4
passed, including its cost and
source of funding, and the
effect of the statewide ballot
measure if it is defeated.
Id. Because the Fair Ballot
Commission is a governmental
commission “concerned with issues
of fact or policy on matters other than
the improvement of the law, the legal
system, or the administration of
justice,” it is the opinion of the
Commission that it is undesirable for
the judge to continue to serve on the
Fair Ballot Commission.
In sum, fulfilling the duties of the
interim dean would require the judge
to engage in activities that are
undesirable or prohibited under the
Canons. It is the opinion of the
Commission that serving in a position
that would require the judge to
engage in activity that is at odds with
the directives of the Canons would
interfere with the judge’s judicial
duties. Therefore, the judge is
prohibited under Canon 5B from
continuing to serve as the interim
dean of a law school.
REFERENCES
Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics
2C, 4, 5, 5B, 5G.
Ala. Code § 17-6-81.
Cynthia Gray, Nexuses and Tangents,
57 CT. REV. 120 (Am. Judges Ass’n
2021).
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 18 of the Alabama Rules of
Procedure of the Judicial Inquiry
Commission. For further
information, you may contact the
Judicial Inquiry Commission, P.O.
Box 303400, Montgomery, Alabama
36130-3400; tel.: (334) 242-4089;
email: [email protected].