Ezel / Ethics Opinions / JUDICIAL-WY

May a Wyoming juvenile judge give general parenting information on an unpaid television program?

Short answer Wyoming JEAC Opinion 2014-02 permits the judge's unpaid weekly parenting segment as a licensed family therapist. The program gives only general information, does not discuss juvenile justice, and does not use the judge's judicial role.
Bar
JUDICIAL-WY
Issued
July 25, 2014
Source
View Original PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2014. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 2014
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A municipal juvenile judge who was also a licensed family therapist had given general parenting information on a weekly television program for years. The judge did not answer individual parenting questions, discuss the juvenile justice system, or express opinions from the perspective of a judge. The participation was unpaid public service.

The committee applied Canon 3 and Rule 3.1, which allow extrajudicial activity within limits concerning judicial duties, disqualification, independence, coercion, and court resources. It treated the program as an educational or civic activity that, on the facts reported, had not conflicted with the judge's court duties.

The committee concluded that the judge's general parenting commentary as a therapist under those conditions violated no Canon or Rule. Its analysis relied on the activity's separation from the judge's juvenile court role and the absence of compensation or specific advice.

In practice

The opinion concerns general, unpaid parenting information delivered in a therapist's capacity. The judge did not use the program to discuss juvenile justice or speak as a juvenile court judge.

Common questions

Q: May the judge continue the weekly parenting television segment?

A: Yes. The committee found no Code violation on the described facts.

Q: Did the judge answer specific questions from parents?

A: No. The opinion says the program offered general topics and no specific parenting advice or answers.

Q: Was the judge appearing on the program in a judicial capacity?

A: No. The judge presented information as a licensed family therapist and did not discuss juvenile justice or express views as a juvenile court judge.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Canon 3 and Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 3.1, which governs extrajudicial activities. It cites Comment [1] recognizing appropriate educational and civic activity when judicial duties, independence, and impartiality are not compromised.

Citations and references

Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct:

  • Canon 3, personal and extrajudicial activities.
  • Rule 3.1(A) through (E), limits on extrajudicial activity.
  • Rule 3.1, Comment [1], educational and civic activities.

See also

No sibling opinions yet indexed.

Source

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 2014. 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