Could a magistrate appear once on a law firm sponsored radio program about legal issues?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1997. 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 magistrate asked about a one-time appearance on a talk radio show sponsored by a law firm and devoted to legal issues.
The Commission applied former Canon 4A and 4B and permitted the appearance. It cautioned the magistrate to stay within Canon 4B subjects and avoid specific matters or areas that might come before the magistrate. It also cited Canon 3B(9)’s limit on comments about pending or impending proceedings.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1997, before West Virginia adopted its 2015 Code of Judicial Conduct, effective December 1, 2015. Subsequent rule changes or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Code before relying on the letter's conclusion.
Common questions
Q: Was the appearance permitted?
A: Yes, as a one-time appearance on the described legal issues program.
Q: Could the magistrate discuss specific cases?
A: No. The Commission said Canon 3B(9) barred discussion of pending or impending cases outside its stated exceptions.
Background and rules framework
Former Canon 4B allowed judges to speak about law and the legal system; Canon 4A limited outside activities. Canon 3B(9) restricted public or nonpublic comments on pending or impending proceedings.
Citations and references
West Virginia Code of Judicial Conduct (former):
- Canon 4A(1)-(3), 4B, and 3B(9).
See also
Source
- Landing page: West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission advisory opinions
- Original PDF: JIC Advisory Opinion 1997-28, redacted
- Code adoption date: West Virginia JIC 2015 Annual Report
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.
JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
212 Dickinson Street
Post Office Box 1629
Charleston, West Virginia 25326-1629
(304) 558-0169 FAX (304) 558-0831
November 25, 1997
Re: JIC Advisory Opinion 1997-28
Dear
Your recent letter to Counsel to the Judicial Investigation Commission.has been reviewed by members of the Commission. In your correspondence you asked if you could appear on a "talk radio" show which deals with legal issues and is sponsored by a law firm. subsequent to your letter you stated that your appearance would be a one-time occurrence.
To address the inquiry which you have made the Commission reviewed the relevant sections of Canon 4 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Canon 4 says in relevant part:
Canon 4. A judge shall so conduct the judge's extra- judicial activities as to minimize the risk of conflict with judicial obligations.
A. Extra-judicial activities in general. - A judge shall conduct all of the judge's extra-judicial activities so that they do not: (1) cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a judge;
(2) demean the judicial officer: or
(3) interfere with the proper performance of judici~l duties.
\
- 2 - November 25, 1997
B. Avocational activities. - A judge may speak, write, lecture, teach, and participate in other extra-judicial activities concerning the law, the legal system, the administration of justice, and non-legal subjects, subject to the requirements of this Code.
Based upon the lan9uage contained in Canon 4, it is the opinion of the Commission that you could participate in the program which you describe in your letter. However, you should exercise 9reat caution when discussing matters on this program. Specifically, you should confine your discussion to those areas addressed by Canon 4B and not talk about specific matters or areas which may come before you as a ma~istrate. You also should be mindful that Canon 3B(9) prohibits, except for statements made in the course of official duties or to explain court procedures, a judge from making any public or non~ublic comment about any pending or impending proceeding. Obviously, this would prevent you from discussing any specific cases.
It is ho~ed that this opinion addresses those concerns which you raised in your recent correspondence to the Commission. If you have ~ny further question regarding this matter, do not hesitate to contact this office.
Very __truly ~
:L-r1..rs~
nw. Bennett, Chairman
JWB/bl
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1997. 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