Can a judge be paid for writing newspaper articles on legal topics?

Currency note

The Board flags this opinion as not current: it issued in 1989 under Ohio's former Code of Judicial Conduct (superseded by the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct effective March 1, 2009), with Canons 1 through 6 amended effective May 1, 1997 and amendments to Chapter 102 of the Ohio Revised Code. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct and Chapter 102 before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Plain-English summary

A judge who had been writing weekly articles for a local newspaper without compensation asked whether he could approach other newspapers to publish the articles for pay. The Board explained that Canon 4A allows a judge to write articles concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice; the drafters thought a judge could analyze the present law and its history, virtues, and shortcomings, and could commend the law or propose reform without compromising impartiality.

The Board concluded the proposed activity was not, by itself, a violation, but cautioned that Canon 5C encourages judges to refrain from business dealings that reflect adversely on impartiality, and that judicial duties take precedence (Canon 3). It noted a 1931 ABA opinion that judges should not write newspaper columns that take considerable time and comment on political and controversial subjects, agreeing with that statement while declining to endorse any flat prohibition on judges writing articles.

On compensation, the Board applied Canon 6: a judge may receive compensation and reimbursement for permitted extra-judicial activities if the source of payment does not give the appearance of influencing the judge or of impropriety, the amount does not exceed a reasonable amount or what a non-judge would receive for the same activity, and the judge reports it as required. It concluded that a judge may write legal articles for newspapers and receive reasonable compensation, but must avoid articles likely to lead to disqualification or impair impartiality.

Common questions

Q: Can a judge write legal articles for a newspaper?

A: Under this opinion, yes. The Board concluded Canon 4A permits a judge to write on the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice.

Q: Can the judge be paid for them?

A: Yes, reasonably. The Board concluded Canon 6 permits reasonable compensation if the payment source does not give the appearance of influence or impropriety and the amount does not exceed what a non-judge would receive, with the judge reporting it.

Q: Were there limits on the subject matter?

A: The Board cautioned that the judge must avoid articles likely to lead to disqualification or impair impartiality, and noted the concern about columns commenting on political or controversial subjects.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Ohio's former Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 4A (writing on the law), Canon 5C (financial and business dealings), Canon 3 (precedence of judicial duties), and Canon 6 (compensation and reporting for extra-judicial activities).

Citations and references

Rules of Judicial Conduct (Ohio):

• Former Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 4A; Canon 5C; Canon 3; Canon 6

Other opinions and authorities cited:

• ABA Committee on Professional Ethics, Op. 52 (1931): judges and newspaper columns
• Thode, Reporter's Notes to the Code of Judicial Conduct, 74 (1973)

See also

• Ohio BPC Opinion 1987-008: Judge Writing a Book Foreword
• Ohio BPC Opinion 1986-002: Judge Teaching a University Class
• Ohio BPC Opinion 1989-022: Judge as Trustee of an Asbestos Claimant Trust Fund

Source

• Landing page: https://ohioadvop.org/advisory-opinion-index/
• Original PDF: https://www.ohioadvop.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Op-89-021.pdf

Original opinion text

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

The Supreme Court of Ohio
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE
41 SOUTH HIGH STREET-SUITE 3370, COLUMBUS, OH 43215-6105
(614) 644-5800 FAX: (614) 644-5804

OFFICE OF SECRETARY

OPINION 89-21
Issued June 16, 1989

[Former CJC Opinion-provides advice under the former Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct which is superseded by the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, eff. 3/1/2009.]

[Not Current- subsequent rule amendments to Canons 1 through 6, Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, eff. May 1, 1997 and amendments to Chapter 102, Ohio Revised Code]

SYLLABUS: A judge is permitted, under Canon 4A of the Code of Judicial Conduct, to write articles for publication on legal topics. A judge may also receive compensation for such an activity provided the source of such payment does not give the appearance of influencing the judge or otherwise give the appearance of impropriety. Furthermore, the amount of compensation should not exceed a reasonable amount nor exceed what someone who is not a judge would receive for the same activity. This opinion does not address any statutory or constitutional provision which may apply.

OPINION: We have before us a request for an advisory opinion on whether a judge may accept compensation for writing articles on various legal topics for newspapers. The requesting party has been writing weekly articles for a local newspaper without receiving compensation. The question is whether the judge may contact other newspapers asking them to publish the articles and receive compensation.

Canon 4A Of the Code of Judicial Conduct allows a judge to write articles concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice. The drafters of the Code were of the opinion that a judge could write on legal issues, analyzing the present law and its history, its virtues and shortcomings. Thode, Reporter's Notes to Code of Judicial Conduct, 74 (1973). Without compromising the judge's capacity to decide an issue impartially, a judge may commend the present law or propose legal reform. Id.

In our view, the activity you propose is not, in and of itself, a violation of any specific Code provision. However, Canon 5C does encourage judges to refrain from financial and business dealings that tend to reflect adversely on the judges' impartiality. In addition, judges should not engage in quasi-judicial or extra-judicial activities which interfere with the proper performance of their judicial duties. Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 5C. The judicial duties of a judge should take precedence over all other activities. Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3.

The ABA issued an opinion in 1931 which concluded that judges were precluded from writing newspaper columns which take considerable time and comment on political issues and controversial subjects. ABA Committee on Professional Ethics, Op. 52 (1931). We do not disagree with that statement, but would not concur with any flat prohibition against judges writing articles.

Canon 6 applies to the issue of whether the judge may receive compensation for writing the articles. A judge may receive compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the quasi-judicial and extra-judicial activities permitted by the Code provided the source of such payment does not give the appearance of influencing the judge in his or her judicial duties or otherwise give the appearance of impropriety. Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 6. The amount of compensation should not exceed a reasonable amount nor exceed what someone who is not a judge would receive for the same activity. Id. A judge who receives such compensation should report it as required under Canon 6.

In conclusion, it is our opinion and you are so advised that a judge may write articles on legal topics for publication in newspapers. However, the judge must avoid writing any articles which would likely lead to the judge's disqualification or impair the judge's impartiality. A judge may receive reasonable compensation for the activity provided the payment does not give the appearance of influencing the judge or any appearance of impropriety.

This is an informal, non-binding advisory opinion based upon the facts presented and limited to questions arising under the Code of Judicial Conduct. This opinion does not address any statutory or constitutional provision which may apply.