May a judge host an unpaid podcast about professional sports for a commercial radio station?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2017. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A judge proposed hosting an unpaid professional-football podcast sponsored by a commercial radio station, using only a first name and not identifying as a judge.
The Committee found no categorical bar under Rules 3.1 and 1.2. It said the judge should obtain written control over promotions, sponsorship, advertising and station-controlled social media content so judicial office would not be exploited. It also cautioned against sports wagering advice.
Rule 2.10 barred comments reasonably expected to affect pending or impending matters in any court, including legal disputes in professional sports. The opinion permitted the podcast only within these constraints.
Common questions
Q: Did the Code categorically forbid the sports podcast?
A: No. The Committee said the topic itself did not trigger the extrajudicial-activity restrictions.
Q: Could the station advertise the host as a judge?
A: No. The opinion called for a written station agreement preventing that identification and other exploitation of judicial office.
Q: Could the judge discuss sports-related litigation?
A: Only within Rule 2.10; the opinion barred statements that might reasonably affect a pending or impending case in any court.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied New Hampshire Code of Judicial Conduct Rules 3.1, 1.2, 2.10 and 1.3 to an unpaid sports podcast sponsored by a commercial broadcaster.
Citations and references
New Hampshire Code of Judicial Conduct: Rules 1.2, 1.3, 2.10, and 3.1. Case cited: Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765 (2002).
See also
Source
- Landing page: New Hampshire Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics opinions
- Original PDF: Opinion 2017-ACJE-01
- Archived official PDF: reviewable capture
Original opinion text
Full opinion text unavailable from the official source; see the linked source above for the complete text.
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2017. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace