HomeMy WebLinkAboutDistrict Court Judicial Support Specialist - Lead JEFFERSON COUNTY
Job Description
Job Title: Judicial Support Specialist- Lead
Department: District Court
Reports To: District Court Administrator
FLSA Exempt(Y/N): No
Union: UFCW
BBP: No
Salary Level: 2 Grades above Judicial Support Specialist II (Grade 25 at current
Step for lead assignment)
Location: Courthouse
Approved By: Human Resources Manager Lc,5 i
Approved Date: July 2020 lJ
SUMMARY
Performs a variety of detailed clerical and office tasks requiring knowledge of court functions and
procedures. Performs a wide variety of highly technical operations requiring specialized clerical
knowledge and possessing the skills and expertise to provide assistance to Judge(s), Court
Administrator,and court staff.
In both Criminal and Civil matters, accuracy and efficiency are critical as even the slightest error
or omission in processing, indexing,posting, filing and disbursement of funds may affect the life
and/or property of members of the public.
P p Y
Must abide by the Code of Judicial Conduct as set forth in addendum 1, specifically Canon 1, 2
& 3. This class is distinguished from the Judicial Support Specialist I and II by the knowledge and
ability to perform all operational activities and some administrative activities associated with case
processing. Requires technical expertise and a high level of accountability. Performs work under the
general supervision of the District Court Administrator. Assists the District Court Administrator in
detailed planning, implementing and managing the daily operations of the Court, and overseeing the
divisions and staff of the District Court. This position exercises independent judgment in applying
established practices and procedures and provides assistance to lesser experienced staff.
ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES include the following. Other duties may
be assigned by Administrator as required.
Acts for the District Court Administrator in his/her absence and assumes duties and
responsibilities.
Assists in hiring,training,planning, scheduling,assigning and directing work, and provides input on
performance evaluations and other management decisions.
Insures staff compliance with Court policies and rules.
Implements changes within the department to accommodate new policies,laws, etc. Assures proper
application of procedures within areas of responsibility.
Jefferson County Job Description: Judicial Support Specialist - Lead Page 2 of 6
Assists District Court Administrator in developing effective caseload management techniques.
Prepares and processes appeals to Superior Court.
Initiates and responds to correspondence related to the department.
Processes data dissemination requests as authorized by the District Court Administrator, following
all Court Rules and Statutes. Analyzes and extracts data from court files and state systems using
extreme caution with respect to confidential data.
Compiles various reports as required.
Balances cash drawers and prepares daily deposits. Assists with accounting activities.
May prepare monthly remittance of money collected with accompanying journals of transactions,
balance bank statements and maintain checkbook records for the Court's bank accounts. Pursues
collections of dishonored checks and initiates procedures for collecting bonds on defendants failing
to appear.
Assists with budget preparation,bankruptcy and collections processing.
Assists with personnel records and preparing payroll documentation for certification by the District
Court Administrator.
Assists with preparing vouchers, and maintaining accurate records of budget expenditures, ordering
supplies and equipment.
Coordinates State computer services and supplies, assists with access and security issues,resolves
operation and statistical problems,trains staff on Court systems.
Oversees the retention, storage and destruction of Court records, and tapes, the storage and return of
Court exhibits, and coordinates the archiving and purging of computer records.
Maintains and updates department procedural manuals.
May perform any or all of the duties of Judicial Support Specialists I and II.
Acts as courtroom clerk during court sessions, records all proceedings, maintains recording logs,
marks exhibits,processes orders of the court and other work as directed.
May serve as Bailiff during jury trials if no Bailiff is available.
Performs other duties as assigned or required.
Jefferson County Job Description: Judicial Support Specialist- Lead Page 3 of 6
SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES
This job has no supervisory responsibilities, but is a"lead"position in the division of
assignment. Lead responsibilities include assisting the District Court Administrator with
interviewing, training,planning, assigning and directing work. Lead positions also provide input
on performance evaluations and other management decisions, and assist in addressing complaints
and resolving problems. The work is highly confidential.
COMPETENCY To perform the job successfully, an individual should demonstrate
competency in the following:
Analytical - Collects and researches data; uses intuition and experience to complement data.
Problem Solving- Identifies and resolves problems in a timely manner; gathers and analyzes
information skillfully; works well in group problem solving situations; uses reason even when
dealing with emotional topics.
Project Management- Coordinates projects; communicates changes and progress; completes
projects on time and within budget.
Technical Skills - Pursues training and development opportunities; strives to continuously build
knowledge and skills; shares expertise with others.
Customer Service - Manages difficult or emotional customer situations; responds to requests for
service and assistance; meets commitments.
Interpersonal Skills -Focuses on solving conflict, not blaming; Maintains confidentiality; Listens
to others without interrupting; Keeps emotions under control; Remains open to others' ideas.
Oral Communication- Speaks clearly and persuasively in positive or negative situations; Listens
and gets clarification; Responds well to questions; Demonstrates group presentation skills;
Participates in meetings.
Written Communication- Writes clearly and informatively; Edits work for spelling and
grammar; Presents numerical data effectively; Able to read and interpret written information.
Teamwork—Supports staff efforts to succeed.
Cost Consciousness - Works within approved budget; Conserves organizational resources.
Diversity - Demonstrates knowledge of EEO policy; Shows respect and sensitivity for cultural
differences.
Ethics - Treats people with respect; Keeps commitments; Inspires the trust of others; Works with
integrity and ethically; Upholds organizational values.
Organizational Support- Follows policies and procedures; Completes administrative tasks
correctly and on time; Supports organization's goals and values.
Judgment- Displays willingness to make decisions; Supports and explains reasoning for
decisions; Includes appropriate people in decision-making process; Makes timely decisions.
Planning/Organizing - Uses time efficiently.
Professionalism - Approaches others in a tactful manner; Reacts well under pressure; Treats
others with respect and consideration regardless of their status or position; Accepts responsibility
for own actions; Follows through on commitments.
Quality- Demonstrates accuracy and thoroughness.
Quantity-Meets productivity standards; Completes work in timely manner.
Safety and Security - Observes safety and security procedures; Reports potentially unsafe
conditions; Uses equipment and materials properly.
Jefferson County Job Description: Judicial Support Specialist- Lead Page 4 of 6
Adaptability-Adapts to changes in the work environment; Manages competing demands;
Changes approach or method to best fit the situation; Able to deal with frequent change, delays,
or unexpected events.
Attendance/Punctuality - Is consistently at work and on time; Ensures work responsibilities are
covered when absent; Arrives at meetings and appointments on time.
Dependability- Follows instructions, responds to management direction; Takes responsibility for
own actions; Keeps commitments; Completes tasks on time or notifies appropriate person with
an alternate plan.
QUALIFICATIONS To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform
each essential duty satisfactorily. The requirements listed below are representative of the
knowledge, skill, and/or ability required. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable
individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.
EDUCATION and/or EXPERIENCE
Must be currently employed as a Judicial Support Specialist II in Jefferson County
District Court with a minimum of four(4) years working as a Judicial Support Specialist
II and two (2) years working as a Judicial Support Specialist I in Jefferson County
District Court.
LANGUAGE SKILLS
Ability to read and interpret documents such as safety rules, operating and maintenance
instructions, and procedure manuals. Ability to write routine reports and correspondence.
Ability to speak effectively before groups of customers or employees of organization.
MATHEMATICAL SKILLS
Ability to add, subtract, multiply, and divide in all units of measure, using whole
numbers, common fractions, and decimals. Ability to compute rate, ratio, and percent and
to draw and interpret bar graphs.
REASONING ABILITY
Ability to apply common sense understanding to carry out instructions furnished in
written, oral, or diagram form. Ability to deal with problems involving several concrete
variables in standardized situations.
COMPUTER SKILLS
To perform this job successfully, an individual should have knowledge of MS Access
database software; MS Windows and Explorer Internet software; MS Excel spreadsheet
software and MS Word, word processing software.
CERTIFICATES, LICENSES,REGISTRATIONS
Must have upon hire and maintain a valid Washington State Driver's License with a driving
record free of serious or frequent violations.
Must pass a thorough background investigation which includes being fingerprinted.
Jefferson County Job Description: Judicial Support Specialist - Lead Page 5 of 6
OTHER KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ABILITIES
Advanced knowledge of District Court practices, principles, and procedures.
Ability to operate computers and other office equipment.
Advance knowledge and proficiency in all aspects of court case management systems and case
processing activity.
Advanced knowledge of accounting principles and procedures.
Advanced knowledge of court related documents, procedures and terminology including the
ability to read and understand the Revised Code of Washington(RCW's) and the Washington
Administrative Code (WAC's).
Ability to analyze and evaluate accounting problems and to discern those requiring policy
determinations by Supervisor.
Ability to work independently with minimal supervision in a high pressure, fast-paced
environment and meet deadlines.
Ability to make decisions in accordance with laws, regulations and Court policies and
procedures.
Ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with co-workers, supervisors,
public officials and the general public.
Ability to multi-task at a high level while performing the essential functions of the job.
Abilityplan workload within a structured environment andof to edit the work o kothers.
Ability to handle sensitive information with a high degree of confidentiality.
Ability to remain alert to safety concerns while in the courtroom, halls or foyer; and the ability to
stay calm in aggressive situations and deal with difficult and potentially volatile persons in a
professional and calm manner.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an
employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job, Reasonable
accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential
functions.
While performing the duties of this job,the employee is regularly required to use hands to finger,
handle, or feel and talk or hear. The employee frequently is required to stand, walk, sit, and reach
with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to climb or balance and stoop,
Jefferson County Job Description: Judicial Support Specialist- Lead Page 6 of 6
kneel, crouch, or crawl. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 35 pounds.
Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision, distance vision, color vision,
peripheral vision, depth perception, and ability to adjust focus.
WORK ENVIRONMENT
The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee '
encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations
may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.
The noise level in the work environment is usually moderate.
CAREER LADDER POSITION
This position is not part of a career ladder.
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (CJC)
PREAMBLE
[1] An independent, fair and impartial judiciary is indispensable to our system of justice. The United States legal
system is based upon the principle that an independent, impartial, and competent judiciary, composed of men and women
of integrity, will interpret and apply the law that governs our society. Thus, the judiciary plays a central role in
preserving the principles of justice and the rule of law. Inherent in all the Rules contained in this Code are the
precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and
strive to maintain and enhance confidence in the legal system.
[2] Judges should maintain the dignity of judicial office at all times, and avoid both impropriety and the
appearance of impropriety in their professional and personal lives. They should aspire at all times to conduct
that ensures the greatest possible public confidence in their independence, impartiality, integrity, and competence.
[3] The Washington State Code of Judicial Conduct establishes standards for the ethical conduct of judges and
judicial candidates. It is not intended as an exhaustive guide. The Code is intended, however, to provide guidance
and assist judges in maintaining the highest standards of judicial and personal conduct, and to provide a basis for
regulating their conduct through the Commission on Judicial Conduct.
[Adopted effective January 1, 2011.]
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (CJC)
SCOPE
[1] The Washington State Code of Judicial Conduct consists of four Canons, numbered Rules under each Canon, and
Comments that generally follow and explain each Rule. Scope and Terminology sections provide additional guidance in
interpreting and applying the Code. An Application section establishes when the various Rules apply to a judge or
judicial candidate.
[2] The Canons state overarching principles of judicial ethics that all judges must observe. They provide important
guidance in interpreting the Rules. A judge may be disciplined only for violating a Rule.
[3] The Comments that accompany the Rules serve two functions. First, they provide guidance regarding the purpose,
meaning, and proper application of the Rules. They contain explanatory material and, in some instances, provide examples
of permitted or prohibited conduct. Comments neither add to nor subtract from the binding obligations set forth in the
Rules. Therefore, when a Comment contains the term "must," it does not mean that the Comment itself is binding or
enforceable; it signifies that the Rule in question, properly understood, is obligatory as to the conduct at issue.
[4] Second, the Comments identify aspirational goals for judges. To implement fully the principles of this Code as
articulated in the Canons, judges should strive to exceed the standards of conduct established by the Rules, holding
themselves to the highest ethical standards and seeking to achieve those aspirational goals, thereby enhancing the
dignity of the judicial office.
[5] The Rules of the Washington State Code of Judicial Conduct are rules of reason that should be applied consistent
with constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules, and decisional law, and with due regard for all relevant
circumstances. The Rules should not be interpreted to impinge upon the essential independence of judges in making
judicial decisions.
[6] Although the black letter of the Rules is binding and enforceable, it is not contemplated that every
transgression will result in the imposition of discipline. It is recognized, for example, that it would be unrealistic
to sanction judges for minor traffic or civil infractions. Whether discipline should be imposed should be determined
through a reasonable and reasoned application of the Rules. The relevant factors for consideration should include the
seriousness of the transgression, the facts and circumstances that existed at the time of the transgression, including
the willfulness or knowledge of the impropriety of the action, the extent of any pattern of improper activity, whether
there have been previous violations, and the effect of the improper activity upon the judicial system or others.
[7] The Code is not designed or intended as a basis for civil or criminal liability. Neither is it intended to be the
basis for litigants to seek collateral remedies against each other or to obtain tactical advantages in proceedings before
a court.
[Adopted effective January 1, 2011.]
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (CJC)
APPLICATION
The Application section establishes when the various Rules apply to a judge, court commissioner, or judge pro tempore.
I. APPLICABILITY OF THIS CODE
(A) A judge, within the meaning of this Code, is anyone who is authorized to perform judicial functions, including an
officer such as a magistrate, court commissioner, part-time judge or judge pro tempore.
(B) The provisions of the Code apply to all judges except as otherwise noted for part-time judges and judges pro
tempore.
(C) All judges shall comply with statutory requirements applicable to their position with respect to reporting and
disclosure of financial affairs.
COMMENT
[1] The Rules in this Code have been formulated to address the ethical obligations of any person who serves a judicial
function, and are premised upon the supposition that a uniform system of ethical principles should apply to all those
authorized to perform judicial functions.
[2] This Code and its Rules do not apply to any person who serves as an administrative law judge or in a judicial
capacity within an administrative agency.
[3] The determination of whether an individual judge is exempt from specific Rules depends upon the facts of the
particular judicial service.
[4] The Legislature has authorized counties to establish and operate drug courts and mental health courts. Judges
presiding in these special courts are subject to these Rules, including Rule 2.9 (A) (1) on ex parte communications, and
must continue to operate within the usual judicial role as an independent decision maker on issues of fact and law.
But the Rules should be applied with the recognition that these courts may properly operate with less formality of
demeanor and procedure than is typical of more traditional courts. Application of the rules should also be attentive to
the terms and waivers in any contract to which the individual whose conduct is being monitored has agreed in exchange for
being allowed to participate in the special court program.
II. PART-TIME JUDGE
(A) A part-time judge is not required to comply:
(1) with Rule 2.10 (Judicial Statements on Pending and Impending Cases) , except while serving as a judge; or
(2) at any time with Rules 3.4 (Appointments to Governmental Positions) , 3.8 (Appointments to Fiduciary Positions) ,
3.9 (Service as Arbitrator or Mediator) , 3.10 (Practice of Law) , 3.11 (Financial, Business, or Remunerative Activities) ,
and 3.14 (Reimbursement of Expenses and Waivers of Fees or Charges) .
(B) A part-time judge shall not act as a lawyer in a proceeding in which the judge has served as a judge or in any other
proceeding related thereto.
(C) When a person who has been a part-time judge is no longer a part-time judge, that person may act as a lawyer in a
proceeding in which he or she served as a judge or in any other proceeding related thereto only with the express consent
of all parties pursuant to the Rules of Professional Conduct.
COMMENT
[1] Part-time judges should be alert to the possibility of conflicts of interest and should liberally disclose on the
record to litigants appearing before them the fact of any extrajudicial employment or other judicial role, even if
there is no apparent reason to withdraw.
[2] In view of Rule 2.1, which provides that the judicial duties of judges should take precedence over all other
activities, part-time judges should not engage in outside employment which would interfere with their ability to sit on
cases that routinely come before them.
III. JUDGE PRO TEMPORE
A judge pro tempore is not required to comply:
(A) except while serving as a judge, with Rule 1.2 (Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary) , Rule 2.4 (External
Influences on Judicial Conduct) , Rule 2.10 (Judicial Statements on Pending and Impending Cases) ; Rule 3.1
(Extrajudicial Activities in General) ; Rule 4.1 (Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial
Candidates in General) or 4.5 (Activities of Judges Who Become Candidates for Nonjudicial Office) ; or
(B) at any time with Rules 3.2 (Appearances before Governmental Bodies and Consultation with Government
Officials) , 3.3 (Acting as a Character Witness) , or 3.4 (Appointments to Governmental Positions) , or with
Rules 3.6 (Affiliation with Discriminatory Organizations) , 3.7 (Participation in Educational, Religious,
Charitable, Fraternal, or Civic Organizations and Activities) , 3.8 (Appointments to Fiduciary Positions) , 3.9
(Service as Arbitrator or Mediator) , 3.10 (Practice of Law) , 3.11 (Financial, Business, or Remunerative
Activities), or 3.12 (Compensation for Extrajudicial Activities) .
(C) A judge pro tempore shall not act as a lawyer in a proceeding in which the judge has served as a judge or in
any other proceeding related thereto.
(D) When a person who has been a judge pro tempore is no longer a judge pro tempore, that person may
act as a lawyer in a proceeding in which he or she served as a judge or in any other proceeding
related thereto only with the express consent of all parties pursuant to the Rules of Professional
Conduct.
VI. TIME FOR COMPLIANCE
A person to whom this Code becomes applicable shall comply immediately with its provisions, except that those judges to
whom Rules 3.8 (Appointments to Fiduciary Positions) and 3.11 (Financial, Business, or Remunerative Activities) apply
shall comply with those Rules as soon as reasonably possible, but in no event later than one year after the Code becomes
applicable to the judge.
COMMENT
[1] If serving as a fiduciary when selected as judge, a new judge may, notwithstanding the prohibitions in Rule 3.8,
continue to serve as fiduciary, but only for that period of time necessary to avoid serious adverse consequences to the
beneficiaries of the fiduciary relationship and in no event longer than one year. Similarly, if engaged at the time of
judicial selection in a business activity, a new judge may, notwithstanding the prohibitions in Rule 3.11, continue in
that activity for a reasonable period but in no event longer than one year.
[Adopted effective January 1, 2011; amended effective June 23, 2015.]
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (CJC)
TERMINOLOGY
The first time any term listed below is used in a Rule in its defined sense, it is followed by an asterisk (*) .
"Aggregate," in relation to contributions for a candidate, means not only contributions in cash or in-kind made directly
to a candidate's campaign committee, but also all contributions made indirectly with the understanding that they will
be used to support the election of a candidate or to oppose the election of the candidate's opponent. See Rules 2.11 and
4.4.
"Appropriate authority" means the authority having responsibility for initiation of disciplinary process in connection
with the violation to be reported. See Rules 2.14 and 2.15.
"Contribution" means both financial and in-kind contributions, such as goods, professional or volunteer services,
advertising, and other types of assistance, which, if obtained by the recipient otherwise, would require a financial
expenditure. See Rules 2.11, 2.13, 3.7, 4.1, and 4.4.
"De minimis," in the context of interests pertaining to disqualification of a judge, means an insignificant interest that
could not raise a reasonable question regarding the judge's impartiality. See Rule 2.11.
"Domestic partner" means a person with whom another person maintains a household and an intimate relationship, other
than a person to whom he or she is legally married. See Rules 2.11, 2.13, 3.13, and 3.14.
"Economic interest" means ownership of more than a de minimis legal or equitable interest. Except for situations in
which the judge participates in the management of such a legal or equitable interest, or the interest could be
substantially affected by the outcome of a proceeding before a judge, it does not include:
(1) an interest in the individual holdings within a mutual or common investment fund;
(2) an interest in securities held by an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization in which
the judge or the judge's spouse, domestic partner, parent, or child serves as a director, an officer, an advisor, or
other participant;
(3) a deposit in a financial institution or deposits or proprietary interests the judge may maintain as a member of a
mutual savings association or credit union, or similar proprietary interests; or
(4) an interest in the issuer of government securities held by the judge.
See Rules 1.3 and 2.11.
"Fiduciary" includes relationships such as executor, administrator, trustee, or guardian. See Rules 2.11, 3.2, and 3.8.
"Financial Support" shall mean the total of contributions to the judge's campaign and independent expenditures in support
of the judge's campaign or against the judge's opponent as defined by RCW 42.17.020.
See Rule 2.11.
"Impartial," "impartiality," and "impartially" mean absence of bias or prejudice in favor of, or against, particular
parties or classes of parties, as well as maintenance of an open mind in considering issues that may come before a judge.
See Canons 1, 2, and 4, and Rules 1.2, 2.2, 2.10, 2.11, 2.13, 3.1, 3.12, 3.13, 4.1, and 4.2.
"Impending matter" is a matter that is imminent or expected to occur in the near future. See Rules 2.9, 2.10, 3.13, and
4.1.
"Impropriety" includes conduct that violates the law, court rules, or provisions of this Code, and conduct that
undermines a judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality. See Canon 1 and Rule 1.2.
"Independence" means a judge's freedom from influence or controls other than those established by law. See Canons 1 and
4, and Rules 1.2, 3.1, 3.12, 3.13, and 4.2.
"Integrity" means probity, fairness, honesty, uprightness, and soundness of character. See Canon 1 and Rule 1.2.
"Invidious discrimination" is a classification which is arbitrary, irrational, and not reasonably related to a
legitimate purpose. Differing treatment of individuals based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin,
ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, or other classification protected by law, are situations where invidious
discrimination may exist. See Rules 3.1 and 3.6.
"Judicial candidate" means any person, including a sitting judge, who is seeking selection for or retention in judicial
office by election or appointment. A person becomes a candidate for judicial office as soon as he or she makes a public
announcement of candidacy, declares or files as a candidate with the election or appointment authority, authorizes or,
where permitted, engages in solicitation or acceptance of contributions or support, or is nominated for election or
appointment to office. See Rules 2.11, 4.1, 4.2, and 4.4.
"Knowingly," "knowledge," "known," and "knows" mean actual knowledge of the fact in question. A person's knowledge
may be inferred from circumstances. See Rules 2.11, 2.13, 2.15, 2.16, 3.6, and 4.1.
"Law" encompasses court rules as well as statutes, constitutional provisions, and decisional law. See Rules 1.1, 2.1,
2.2, 2.6, 2.7, 2.9, 3.1, 3.4, 3.9, 3.12, 3.13, 3.14, 3.15, 4.1, 4.2, 4.4, and 4.5.
"Member of the candidate's family" means a spouse, domestic partner, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, or other
relative or person with whom the candidate maintains a close familial relationship.
"Member of the judge's family" means a spouse, domestic partner, child, grandchild, parent, grandparent, or other
relative or person with whom the judge maintains a close familial relationship. See Rules 3.7, 3.8, 3.10, and 3.11.
"Member of a judge's family residing in the judge's household" means any relative of a judge by blood or marriage, or a
person treated by a judge as a member of the judge's family, who resides in the judge's household. See Rules 2.11 and
3.13.
"Nonpublic information" means information that is not available to the public. Nonpublic information may include, but is
not limited to, information that is sealed by statute or court order or impounded or communicated in camera, and
information offered in grand jury proceedings, presentencing reports, dependency cases, or psychiatric reports. See Rule
3.5.
"Part-time judge" Part-time judges are judges who serve on a continuing or periodic basis, but are permitted by law to
devote time to some other profession or occupation and whose compensation for that reason is less than a full-time judge.
A person who serves part-time as a judge on a regular or periodic basis in excess of eleven cases or eleven dockets
annually, counted cumulatively without regard to each jurisdiction in which that person serves as a judge, is a part-time
judge.
"Pending matter" is a matter that has commenced. A matter continues to be pending through any appellate process until
final disposition. See Rules 2.9, 2.10, 3.13, and 4.1.
"Personally solicit" means a direct request made by a judge or a judicial candidate for financial support or in-kind
services, whether made by letter, telephone, or any other means of communication. See Rule 4.1.
"Political organization" means a political party or other group sponsored by or affiliated with a political party or
candidate, the principal purpose of which is to further the election or appointment of candidates for political office.
For purposes of this Code, the term does not include a judicial candidate's campaign committee created as authorized by
Rule 4.4. See Rules 4.1 and 4.2.
"Pro tempore judge" Without regard to statutory or other definitions of a pro tempore judge, within the meaning of this
Code a pro tempore judge is a person who serves only once or at most sporadically under a separate appointment for a
case or docket. Pro tempore judges are excused from compliance with certain provisions of this Code because of their
infrequent service as judges. A person who serves or expects to serve part-time as a judge on a regular or periodic
basis in fewer than twelve cases or twelve dockets annually, counted cumulatively without regard to each jurisdiction
in which that person serves as a judge, is a pro tempore judge.
"Public election" includes primary and general elections, partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, and retention
elections. See Rules 4.2 and 4.4.
"Third degree of relationship" includes the following persons: great-grandparent, grandparent, parent, uncle, aunt,
brother, sister, child, grandchild, great-grandchild, nephew, and niece. See Rule 2.11.
Washington State Code of Judicial Conduct
Table of Canons
CANON 1
A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD AND PROMOTE THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY, AND
SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.
RULE 1.1 Compliance with the Law
RULE 1.2 Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary
RULE 1.3 Avoiding Abuse of the Prestige of Judicial Office
CANON 2
A JUDGE SHOULD PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE
IMPARTIALLY, COMPETENTLY, AND DILIGENTLY.
RULE 2.1 Giving Precedence to the Duties of Judicial Office
RULE 2.2 Impartiality and Fairness
RULE 2.3 Bias, Prejudice and Harassment
RULE 2.4 External Influences on Judicial Conduct
RULE 2.5 Competence, Diligence, and Cooperation
RULE 2.6 Ensuring the Right to Be Heard
RULE 2.7 Responsibility to Decide
RULE 2.8 Decorum, Demeanor, and Communication with Jurors
RULE 2.9 Ex Parte Communications
RULE 2.10 Judicial Statements on Pending and Impending Cases
RULE 2.11 Disqualification
RULE 2.12 Supervisory Duties
RULE 2.13 Administrative Appointments.
RULE 2.14 Disability and Impairment
RULE 2.15 Responding to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct
RULE 2.16 Cooperation with Disciplinary Authorities
CANON 3
A JUDGE SHALL CONDUCT THE JUDGE'S PERSONAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITIES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF CONFLICT
WITH THE OBLIGATIONS OF JUDICIAL OFFICE.
RULE 3.1 Extrajudicial Activities in General
RULE 3.2 Appearances before Governmental Bodies and Consultation with Government Officials
RULE 3.3 Testifying as Character Witness
RULE 3.4 Appointments to Governmental Positions
RULE 3.5 Use of Nonpublic Information
RULE 3.6 Affiliation with Discriminatory Organizations
RULE 3.7 Participation in Educational, Religious, Charitable, Fraternal, or Civic Organizations and Activities
RULE 3.8 Appointments to Fiduciary Positions
RULE 3.9 Service as Arbitrator or Mediator
RULE 3.10 Practice of Law
RULE 3.11 Financial, Business, or Remunerative Activities
RULE 3.12 Compensation for Extrajudicial Activities
RULE 3.13 Acceptance and Reporting of Gifts, Loans, Bequests, Benefits, or Other Things of Value
RULE 3.14 Reimbursement of Expenses and Waivers of Fees or Charges
RULE 3.15 Reporting Requirements
CANON 4
A JUDGE OR CANDIDATE FOR JUDICIAL OFFICE SHALL NOT ENGAGE IN POLITICAL OR CAMPAIGN ACTIVITY THAT IS
INCONSISTENT WITH THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, OR IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY.
RULE 4.1 Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial Candidates in General
RULE 4.2 Political and Campaign Activities of Judicial Candidates in Public Elections
RULE 4.3 Activities of Candidates for Appointive Judicial Office
RULE 4.4 Campaign Committees
RULE 4.5 Activities of Judges Who Become Candidates for Nonjudicial Office
CANON 1
A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD AND PROMOTE THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE
JUDICIARY, AND SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.
RULE 1.1
Compliance with the Law
A judge shall comply with the law,* including the Code of Judicial Conduct.
COMMENT
See Scope [6] .
RULE 1.2
Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary
A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence,*
integrity,* and impartiality* of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of
impropriety.*
COMMENT
[1] Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by improper conduct. This principle applies to both the
professional and personal conduct of a judge.
[2] A judge should expect to be the subject of public scrutiny that might be viewed as burdensome if
applied to other citizens, and must accept the restrictions imposed by the Code.
[3] Conduct that compromises the independence, integrity, and impartiality of a judge undermines
public confidence in the judiciary.
[4] Judges should participate in activities that promote ethical conduct among judges and lawyers,
support professionalism within the judiciary and the legal profession, and promote access to justice for
all.
[5] Actual improprieties include violations of law, court rules, or provisions of this Code. The test for
appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that
the judge violated this Code or engaged in other conduct that reflects adversely on the judge's honesty,
impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge.
[6] A judge should initiate and participate in community outreach activities for the purpose of
promoting public understanding of and confidence in the administration of justice. In conducting such
activities, the judge must act in a manner consistent with this Code.
RULE 1.3
Avoiding Abuse of the Prestige of Judicial Office
A judge shall not abuse the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests* of
the judge or others, or allow others to do so.
COMMENT
[1] It is improper for a judge to use or attempt to use his or her position to gain personal advantage or
deferential treatment of any kind. For example, it would be improper for a judge to allude to his or her
judicial status to gain favorable treatment in encounters with traffic officials. Similarly, a judge must not
use judicial letterhead to gain an advantage in conducting his or her personal business.
[2] A judge may provide a reference or recommendation for an individual based upon the judge's
personal knowledge. The judge may use official letterhead if the judge indicates that the reference is
personal and if there is no likelihood that the use of the letterhead would reasonably be perceived as an
attempt to exert pressure by reason of the judicial office.
[3] Judges may participate in the process of judicial selection by cooperating with appointing authorities
and screening committees, and by responding to inquiries from such entities concerning the
professional qualifications of a person being considered for judicial office.
[4] Special considerations arise when judges write or contribute to publications of for-profit entities,
whether related or unrelated to the law. A judge should not permit anyone associated with the
publication of such materials to exploit the judge's office in a manner that violates this Rule or other
applicable law. In contracts for publication of a judge's writing, the judge should retain sufficient control
over the advertising to avoid such exploitation.
[Adopted effective January 1, 2011.]
CANON 2
A JUDGE SHOULD PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE IMPARTIALLY, COMPETENTLY, AND DILIGENTLY.
RULE 2.1
Giving Precedence to the Duties of Judicial Office
The duties of judicial office, as prescribed by law,* shall take precedence over all of a judge's personal and
extrajudicial activities.
COMMENT
[1] To ensure that judges are available to fulfill their judicial duties, judges must conduct their personal
and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflicts that would result in frequent disqualification. See
Canon 3.
[2] Although it is not a duty of judicial office unless prescribed by law, judges are encouraged to
participate in activities that promote public understanding of and confidence in the justice system.
RULE 2.2
Impartiality and Fairness
A judge shall uphold and apply the law,* and shall perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.*
COMMENT
[1] To ensure impartiality and fairness to all parties, a judge must be objective and open-minded.
[2] Although each judge comes to the bench with a unique background and personal philosophy, a judge must
interpret and apply the law without regard to whether the judge approves or disapproves of the law in question.
[3] When applying and interpreting the law, a judge sometimes may make good-faith errors of fact or law.
Errors of this kind do not violate this Rule.
[4] It is not a violation of this Rule for a judge to make reasonable accommodations to ensure pro se
litigants the opportunity to have their matters fairly heard.
RULE 2.3
Bias, Prejudice, and Harassment
(A) A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office, including administrative duties, without bias or
prejudice.
(B) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice,
or engage in harassment, and shall not permit court staff, court officials, or others subject to the judge's direction
and control to do so.
(C) A judge shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from manifesting bias or
prejudice, or engaging in harassment, against parties, witnesses, lawyers, or others.
(D) The restrictions of paragraphs (B) and (C) do not preclude judges or lawyers from making reference to
factors that are relevant to an issue in a proceeding.
COMMENT
[1] A judge who manifests bias or prejudice in a proceeding impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings
the judiciary into disrepute.
[2] Examples of manifestations of bias or prejudice include but are not limited to epithets; slurs; demeaning
nicknames; negative stereotyping; attempted humor based upon stereotypes; threatening, intimidating, or hostile acts;
suggestions of connections between race, ethnicity, or nationality and crime; and irrelevant references to personal
characteristics. Even facial expressions and body language can convey to parties and lawyers in the proceeding, jurors,
the media, and others an appearance of bias or prejudice. A judge must avoid conduct that may reasonably be perceived as
prejudiced or biased.
[3] Harassment, as referred to in paragraphs (B) and (C) , is verbal or physical conduct that denigrates or
shows hostility or aversion toward a person on bases such as race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity,
disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation.
[4] Sexual harassment includes but is not limited to sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other
verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is unwelcome.
[5] "Bias or prejudice" does not include references to or distinctions based upon race, color, sex, religion,
national origin, disability, age, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy, parenthood, sexual orientation,
or social or economic status when these factors are legitimately relevant to the advocacy or decision of the proceeding,
or, with regard to administrative matters, when these factors are legitimately relevant to the issues involved.
RULE 2.4
External Influences on Judicial Conduct
(A) A judge shall not be swayed by public clamor, or fear of criticism.
(B) A judge shall not permit family, social, political, financial, or other interests or relationships to
influence the judge's judicial conduct or judgment.
(C) A judge shall not convey or authorize others to convey the impression that any person or organization is
in a position to influence the judge.
COMMENT
[1] Judges shall decide cases according to the law and facts, without regard to whether particular laws or
litigants are popular or unpopular with the public, the media, government officials, or the judge's friends or family.
RULE 2.5
Competence, Diligence, and Cooperation
(A) A judge shall perform judicial and administrative duties, competently and diligently.
(B) A judge shall cooperate with other judges and court officials in the administration of court business.
COMMENT
[1] Competence in the performance of judicial duties requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and
preparation reasonably necessary to perform a judge's responsibilities of judicial office.
[2] In accordance with GR 29, a judge should seek the necessary docket time, court staff, expertise, and
resources to discharge all adjudicative and administrative responsibilities.
[3] Prompt disposition of the court's business requires a judge to devote adequate time to judicial duties,
to be punctual in attending court and expeditious in determining matters under submission, and to take reasonable
measures to ensure that court officials, litigants, and their lawyers cooperate with the judge to that end.
[4] In disposing of matters promptly and efficiently, a judge must demonstrate due regard for the rights of
parties to be heard and to have issues resolved without unnecessary cost or delay. A judge should monitor and supervise
cases in ways that reduce or eliminate dilatory practices, avoidable delays, and unnecessary costs.
RULE 2.6
Ensuring the Right to Be Heard
(A) A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's lawyer,
the right to be heard according to law.*
(B) Consistent with controlling court rules, a judge may encourage parties to a proceeding and their lawyers
to settle matters in dispute but should not act in a manner that coerces any party into settlement.
COMMENT
[1] The right to be heard is an essential component of a fair and impartial system of justice. Substantive
rights of litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the right to be heard are observed.
[2] The judge plays an important role in overseeing the settlement of disputes, but should be careful that
efforts to further settlement do not undermine any party's right to be heard according to law. The judge should keep
in mind the effect that the judge's participation in settlement discussions may have, not only on the judge's own views
of the case, but also on the perceptions of the lawyers and th e parties if the case remains with the judge after
settlement efforts are unsuccessful. Among the factors that a judge should consider when deciding upon an appropriate
settlement practice for a case are (1) whether the parties have requested or voluntarily consented to a certain level
of participation by the judge in settlement discussions, (2) whether the parties and their counsel are relatively
sophisticated in legal matters, (3) whether the case will be tried by the judge or a jury, (4) whether the parties
participate with their counsel in settlement discussions, (5) whether any parties are unrepresented by counsel, and
(6) whether the matter is civil or criminal.
[3] Judges must be mindful of the effect settlement discussions can have, not only on their objectivity and
impartiality, but also on the appearance of their objectivity and impartiality. Despite a judge's best efforts, there
may be instances when information obtained during settlement discussions could influence a judge's decision making during
trial, and, in such instances, the judge should consider whether disqualification or recusal may be appropriate.
See Rule 2.11(A) (1) .
RULE 2.7
Responsibility to Decide
A judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the judge, except when disqualification or recusal is required by
Rule 2.11 or other law.*
COMMENT
[1] Judges must be available to decide the matters that come before the court. Although there are times when
disqualification is necessary to protect the rights of litigants and preserve public confidence in the independence,
integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, judges must be available to decide matters that come before the courts.
Unwarranted disqualification may bring public disfavor to the court and to the judge personally. The dignity of the
court, the judge's respect for fulfillment of judicial duties, and a proper concern for the burdens that may be imposed
upon the judge's colleagues require that a judge not use disqualification or recusal to avoid cases that present
difficult, controversial, or unpopular issues.
RULE 2.8
Decorum, Demeanor, and Communication with Jurors
(A) A judge shall require order and decorum in proceedings before the court.
(B) A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, court staff,
court officials, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and shall require similar conduct of
lawyers, court staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge's direction and control.
(C) A judge shall not commend or criticize jurors for their verdict other than in a court order or opinion in a
proceeding.
COMMENT
[1] The duty to hear all proceedings with patience and courtesy is not inconsistent with the duty imposed in
Rule 2.5 to dispose promptly of the business of the court. Judges can be efficient and businesslike while being patient
and deliberate.
[2] Commending or criticizing jurors for their verdict may imply a judicial expectation in future cases and may
impair a juror's ability to be fair and impartial in a subsequent case.
[3] A judge who is not otherwise prohibited by law from doing so may meet with jurors who choose to remain
after trial but should be careful not to discuss the merits of the case.
RULE 2.9
Ex Parte Communications
(A) A judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications
made to the judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers, concerning a pending* or impending matter,*
before that judge's court except as follows:
(1) When circumstances require it, ex parte communication for scheduling, administrative, or emergency
purposes, which does not address substantive matters, or ex parte communication pursuant to a written policy or rule
for a mental health court, drug court, or other therapeutic court, is permitted, provided:
(a) the judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a procedural, substantive, or tactical advantage as
a result of the ex parte communication; and
(b) the judge makes provision promptly to notify all other parties of the substance of the ex parte
communication, and gives the parties an opportunity to respond.
(2) A judge may obtain the written advice of a disinterested expert on the law applicable to a proceeding
before the judge, if the judge affords the parties a reasonable opportunity to object and respond to the advice received.
(3) A judge may consult with court staff and court officials whose functions are to aid the judge in carrying
out the judge's adjudicative responsibilities, or with other judges, provided the judge makes reasonable efforts to
avoid receiving factual information that is not part of the record, and does not abrogate the responsibility personally
to decide the matter.
(4) A judge may, with the consent of the parties, confer separately with the parties and their lawyers in an
effort to settle matters pending before the judge.
(5) A judge may initiate, permit, or consider any ex parte communication when expressly authorized by law* to
do so.
(B) If a judge inadvertently receives an unauthorized ex parte communication bearing upon the substance of a
matter, the judge shall make provision promptly to notify the parties of the substance of the communication and provide
the parties with an opportunity to respond.
(C) A judge shall not investigate facts in a matter pending or impending before that judge, and shall consider
only the evidence presented and any facts that may properly be judicially noticed, unless expressly authorized by law.
(D) A judge shall make reasonable efforts, including providing appropriate supervision, to ensure that this
Rule is not violated by court staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge's direction and control.
COMMENT
[1] To the extent reasonably possible, all parties or their lawyers shall be included in communications with
a judge.
[2] Whenever the presence of a party or notice to a party is required by this Rule, it is the party's lawyer,
or if the party is unrepresented, the party, who is to be present or to whom notice is to be given.
[3] The proscription against communications concerning a proceeding includes communications with lawyers, law
teachers, and other persons who are not participants in the proceeding, except to the limited extent permitted by this
Rule.
[4] A judge may initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications expressly authorized by law, such as when
serving on therapeutic or problem-solving courts, mental health courts, or drug courts. In this capacity, judges may
assume a more interactive role with parties, treatment providers, probation officers, social workers, and others.
[5] A judge may consult on pending matters with other judges, or with retired judges who no longer practice
law and are enrolled in a formal judicial mentoring program (such as the Washington Superior Court Judges' Association
Mentor Judge Program) . Such consultations must avoid ex parte discussions of a case with judges who have previously been
disqualified from hearing the matter, and with judges or retired judges who have appellate jurisdiction over the matter.
[6] The prohibition against a judge investigating the facts in a matter extends to information available in all
mediums, including electronic.
[7] A judge may consult ethics advisory committees, outside counsel, or legal experts concerning the judge's
compliance with this Code. Such consu ltations are not subject to the restrictions of paragraph (A) (2) .
[Adopted effective January 1, 2011; amended effective September 1, 2013.]
RULE 2.10
Judicial Statements on Pending and Impending Cases
(A) A judge shall not make any public statement that would reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or
impair the fairness of a matter pending* or impending* in any court, or make any nonpublic statement that would
reasonably be expected to substantially interfere with a fair trial or hearing.
(B) A judge shall not, in connection with cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the
court, make pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial* performance of the adjudicative
duties of judicial office.
(C) A judge shall require court staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge's direction and control
to refrain from making statements that the judge would be prohibited from making by paragraphs (A) and (B) .
(D) Notwithstanding the restrictions in paragraph (A) , a judge may make public statements in the course of
official duties, may explain court procedures, and may comment on any proceeding in which the judge is a litigant in a
personal capacity.
(E) Subject to the requirements of paragraph (A) , a judge may respond directly or through a third party to
allegations in the media or elsewhere concerning the judge's conduct in a matter.
COMMENT
[1] This Rule's restrictions on judicial speech are essential to the maintenance of the independence,
integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary.
[2] This Rule does not prohibit a judge from commenting on proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a
personal capacity. In cases in which the judge is a litigant in an official capacity, such as a writ of mandamus, the
judge must not comment publicly.
[3] Depending upon the circumstances, the judge should consider whether it may be preferable for a third party,
rather than the judge, to respond or issue statements in connection with allegations concerning the judge's conduct in a
matter.
[4] A judge should use caution in discussing the rationale for a decision and limit such discussion to what
is already public record or controlling law.
RULE 2.11
Disqualification
(A) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge's impartiality* might
reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances:
(1) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's lawyer, or personal knowledge*
of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding.
(2) The judge knows* that the judge, the judge's spouse or domestic partner,* or a person within the third
degree of relationship* to either of them, or the spouse or domestic partner of such a person is:
(a) a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, general partner, managing member, or trustee of a
party;
(b) acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(c) a person who has more than a de minimis* interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding;
or
(d) likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.
(3) The judge knows that he or she, individually or as a fiduciary,* or the judge's spouse, domestic partner,
parent, or child, or any other member of the judge's family residing in the judge's household,* has an economic interest*
in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding.
(4) [Reserved]
(5) The judge, while a judge or a judicial candidate,* has made a public statement, other than in a court
proceeding,
judicial decision, or opinion, that commits the judge to reach a particular result or rule in a particular
7
way in the proceeding or controversy.
(6) The judge:
a served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or was associated with a lawyer who participated
( ) wY Y �'rY
substantially as a lawyer or a material witness in the matter during such association;
(b) served in governmental employment, and in such capacity participated personally and substantially as a
public official concerning the proceeding, or has publicly expressed in such capacity an opinion concerning the merits
of the particular matter in controversy;
(c) was a material witness concerning the matter; or
(d) previously presided as a judge over the matter in another court.
(B) A judge shall keep informed about the judge's personal and fiduciary economic interests, and make a
reasonable effort to keep informed about the personal economic interests of the judge's spouse or domestic partner and
minor children residing in the judge's household.
(C) A judge disqualified by the terms of Rule 2.11(A) (2) or Rule 2.11(A) (3) may, instead of withdrawing from
the proceeding, disclose on the record the basis of the disqualification. If, based on such disclosure, the parties and
lawyers, independently of the judge's participation, all agree in writing or on the record that the judge's relationship
is immaterial or that the judge's economic interest is de minimis, the judge is no longer disqualified, and may
participate in the proceeding. When a party is not immediately available, the judge may proceed on the assurance of the
lawyer that the party's consent will be subsequently given.
(D) A judge may disqualify himself or herself if the judge learns by means of a timely motion by a party that
an adverse party has provided financial support for any of the judge's judicial election campaigns within the last six
years in an amount that causes the judge to conclude that his or her impartiality might reasonably be questioned. In
making this determination the judge should consider:
(1) the total amount of financial support provided by the party relative to the total amount of the financial
support for the judge's election,
(2) the timing between the financial support and the pendency of the matter, and
(3) any additional circumstances pertaining to disqualification.
COMMENT
[1] Under this Rule, a judge is disqualified whenever the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned,
regardless of whether any of the specific provisions of paragraphs (A) (1) through (5) apply. In many jurisdictions in
Washington, the term "recusal" is used interchangeably with the term "disqualification."
[2] A judge's obligation not to hear or decide matters in which disqualification is required applies
regardless of whether a motion to disqualify is filed.
[3] The rule of necessity may override the rule of disqualification. For example, a judge might be required to
participate in judicial review of a judicial salary statute, or might be the only judge available in a matter requiring
immediate judicial action, such as a hearing on probable cause or a temporary restraining order. In matters that require
immediate action, the judge must disclose on the record the basis for possible disqualification and make reasonable
efforts to transfer the matter to another judge as soon as practicable.
[4] The fact that a lawyer in a proceeding is affiliated with a law firm with which a relative of the judge
is affiliated does not itself disqualify the judge. If, however, the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned
under paragraph (A) , or the relative is known by the judge to have an interest in the law firm that could be
substantially affected by the proceeding under paragraph (A) (2) (c) , the judge's disqualification is required.
[5] A judge should disclose on the record information that the judge believes the parties or their lawyers
might reasonably consider relevant t o a possible motion for disqualification, even if the judge believes there is no
basis for disqualification.
[6] "Economic interest," as set forth in the Terminology section, means ownership of more than a de minimis
legal or equitable interest. Except for situations in which a judge participates in the management of such a legal or
equitable interest, or the interest could be substantially affected by the outcome of a proceeding before a judge, it
does not include:
(1) an interest in the individual holdings within a mutual or common investment fund;
(2) an interest in securities held by an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization
in which the judge or the judge's spouse, domestic partner, parent, or child serves as a director, officer, advisor, or
other participant;
(3) a deposit in a financial institution or deposits or proprietary interests the judge may maintain as a
member of a mutual savings association or credit union, or similar proprietary interests; or
(4) an interest in the issuer of government securities held by the judge.
[7] [Reserved]
[8] [Reserved]
RULE 2.12
Supervisory Duties
(A) A judge shall require court staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge's direction and
control to act with fidelity and in a diligent manner consistent with the judge's obligations under this Code.
(B) A judge with supervisory authority for the performance of other judges shall take reasonable measures to
ensure that those judges properly discharge their judicial responsibilities, including the prompt disposition of matters
before them.
COMMENT
[1] A judge is responsible for his or her own conduct and for the conduct of others, such as staff, when those
persons are acting at the judge's direction or control. A judge may not direct court personnel to engage in conduct on
the judge's behalf or as the judge's representative when such conduct would violate the Code if undertaken by the judge.
[2] Public confidence in the judicial system depends upon timely justice. To promote the efficient
administration of justice, a judge with supervisory authority must take the steps needed to ensure that judges under his
or her supervision administer their workloads promptly.
RULE 2.13
Administrative Appointments
(A) In making administrative appointments, a judge:
(1) shall exercise the power of appointment impartially* and on the basis of merit; and
(2) shall avoid nepotism and unnecessary appointments.
(B) A judge shall not appoint a lawyer to a position under circumstances where it would be reasonably to be
interpreted to be quid pro quo for campaign contributions or other favors, unless:
(1) the position is substantially uncompensated;
(2) the lawyer has been selected in rotation from a list of qualified and available lawyers compiled without
regard to their having made political contributions; or
(3) the judge or another presiding or administrative judge affirmatively finds that no other lawyer is
willing, competent, and able to accept the position.
(C) A judge shall not approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered.
COMMENT
[1] Appointees of a judge include assigned counsel, officials such as referees, commissioners, special
masters, receivers, and guardians, and personnel such as clerks, secretaries, and bailiffs. Consent by the parties
to an appointment or an award of compensation does not relieve the judge of the obligation prescribed by paragraph
(AO.
[2] Unless otherwise defined by law, nepotism is the appointment or hiring of any relative within the third
degree of relationship of either the judge or the judge's spouse or domestic partner, or the spouse or domestic partner
of such relative.
RULE 2.14
Disability and Impairment
A judge having a reasonable belief that the performance of a lawyer or another judge is impaired by drugs or alcohol, or
by a mental, emotional, or physical condition, shall take appropriate action, which may include a confidential referral
to a lawyer or judicial assistance program.
COMMENT
[1] "Depending upon the gravity of Appropriate action" means action intended and reasonably likely to help the
judge or lawyer in question address the problem and prevent harm to the justice system. Depending upon the
circumstances, appropriate action may include but is not limited to speaking directly to the impaired person, notifying
an individual with supervisory responsibility over the impaired person, or making a referral to an assistance program.
[2] Taking or initiating corrective action by way of referral to an assistance program may satisfy a judge's
responsibility under this Rule. Assistance programs have many approaches for offering help to impaired judges and
lawyers, such as intervention, counseling, or referral to appropriate health care professionals. Depending upon the
gravity of the conduct that has come to the judge's attention, however, the judge may be required to take other action,
such as reporting the impaired judge or lawyer to the appropriate authority, agency, or body. See Rule 2.15.
RULE 2.15
Responding to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct
(A) A judge having knowledge* that another judge has committed a violation of this Code that raises a
substantial question regarding the judge's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a judge in other respects should
inform the appropriate authority.*
(B) A judge having knowledge that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that
raises a substantial question regarding the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects
should inform the appropriate authority.
(C) A judge who receives credible information indicating a substantial likelihood that another judge has
committed a violation of this Code should take appropriate action.
(D) A judge who receives credible information indicating a substantial likelihood that a lawyer has committed
a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct should take appropriate action.
COMMENT
[1] Judges are not required to report the misconduct of other judges or lawyers. Self regulation of the legal
and judicial professions, however, creates an aspiration that judicial officers report misconduct to the appropriate
disciplinary authority when they know of a serious violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct or the Rules of Professional
Conduct. An apparently isolated violation may indicate a pattern of misconduct that only a disciplinary violation can
uncover. Reporting a violation is especially important where the victim is unlikely to discover the offense.
[2] While judges are not obliged to report every violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct or the Rules of
Professional Conduct, the failure to report may undermine the public confidence in legal profession and the judiciary.
A measure of judgment is, therefore, required in deciding whether to report a violation. The term "substantial" refers
to the seriousness of the possible offense and not the quantum of evidence of which the judge is aware. A report should
be made when a judge or lawyer's conduct raises a serious question as to the h onesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a
judge or lawyer.
[3] Appropriate action under sections (C) and (D) may include communicating directly with the judge or lawyer
who may have violated the Code of Judicial Conduct or the Rules of Professional Conduct, communicating with a supervising
judge or reporting the suspected violation to the appropriate authority or other authority or other agency or body.
[4] Information about a judge's or lawyer's conduct may be received by a judge in the course of that judge's
participation in an approved lawyers or judges assistance program. In that circumstance there is no requirement or
aspiration of reporting (APR 19(b) and DRJ 14(e)) .
RULE 2.16
Cooperation with Disciplinary Authorities
(A) A judge shall cooperate and be candid and honest with judicial and lawyer disciplinary agencies.
(B) A judge shall not retaliate, directly or indirectly, against a person known* or suspected to have assisted
or cooperated with an investigation of a judge or a lawyer.
COMMENT
[1] Cooperation with investigations and proceedings of judicial and lawyer disciplinary agencies, as required
in paragraph (A) , instills confidence in judges' commitment to the integrity of the judicial system and the protection of
the public.
[Adopted effective January 1, 2011; amended effective September 1, 2013.]
CANON 3
A JUDGE SHALL CONDUCT THE JUDGE'S PERSONAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITIES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF CONFLICT
WITH THE OBLIGATIONS OF JUDICIAL OFFICE.
RULE 3.1
Extrajudicial Activities in General
A judge may engage in extrajudicial activities, except as prohibited by law* or this Code. However, when engaging in
extrajudicial activities, a judge shall not:
(A) participate in activities that will interfere with the proper performance of the judge's judicial duties;
(B) participate in activities that will lead to frequent disqualification of the judge; except activities
expressly allowed under this code. This rule does not apply to national or state military service;
(C) participate in activities that would undermine the judge's independence,* integrity,* or impartiality;*
(D) engage in conduct that would be coercive; or
(E) make extrajudicial or personal use of court premises, staff, stationery, equipment, or other resources,
except for incidental use permitted by law.
COMMENT
[1] Participation in both law-related and other extrajudicial activities helps integrate judges into their
communities, and furthers public understanding of and respect for courts and the judicial system. To the extent that
time permits, and judicial independence and impartiality are not compromised, judges are encouraged to engage in
appropriate extrajudicial activities. Judges are uniquely qualified to engage in extrajudicial activities that concern
the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice, such as by speaking, writing, teaching, or participating
in scholarly research projects. In addition, judges are permitted and encouraged to engage in educational, religious,
charitable, fraternal or civic extrajudicial activities not conducted for profit, even when the activities do not involve
the law. See Rule 3.7.
[2] Discriminatory actions and expressions of bias or prejudice by a judge, even outside the judge's official
or judicial actions, are likely to appear to a reasonable person to call into question the judge's integrity and
impartiality. Examples include jokes or other remarks that demean individuals based upon their race, sex, gender,
religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status. For the same reason,
a judge's extrajudicial activities must not be conducted in connection or affiliation with an organization that practices
invidious discrimination.
[3] While engaged in permitted extrajudicial activities, judges must not coerce others or take action that
would reasonably be perceived as coercive. For example, depending upon the circumstances, a judge's solicitation of
contributions or memberships for an organization, even as permitted by Rule 3.7(A) , might create the risk that the person
solicited would feel obligated to respond favorably, or would do so to curry favor with the judge.
[4] Before speaking or writing about social or political issues, judges should consider the impact of their
statements under Canon 3.
RULE 3.2
Appearances before Governmental Bodies and Consultation with Government Officials
A judge shall not appear voluntarily at a public hearing before, or otherwise consult with, an executive or a legislative
body or official, except:
(A) in connection with matters concerning the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice;
(B) in connection with matters about which the judge acquired knowledge or expertise in the course of the
judge's judicial duties; or
(C) when the judge is acting in a matter involving the judge's, the judge's marital community's, or the
judge's domestic partnership's legal or economic interests, or those of members of the judge's immediate family residing
in the judge's household, or when the judge is acting in a fiduciary* capacity. In engaging in such activities, however,
judges must exercise caution to avoid abusing the prestige of judicial office.
COMMENT
[1] Judges possess special expertise in matters of law, the legal system, and the administration of justice,
and may properly share that expertise with governmental bodies and executive or legislative branch officials.
[2] In appearing before governmental bodies or consulting with government officials, judges must be mindful
that they remain subject to other provisions of this Code, such as Rule 1.3, prohibiting judges from using the prestige
of office to advance their own or others' interests, Rule 2.10, governing public comment on pending and impending matters,
and Rule 3.1(C) , prohibiting judges from engaging in extrajudicial activities that would appear to a reasonable person to
undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality.
RULE 3.3
Acting as a Character Witness
A judge shall not act as a character witness in a judicial, administrative, or other adjudicatory proceeding or otherwise
vouch for the character of a person in a legal proceeding, except when duly summoned.
COMMENT
[1] A judge who, without being subpoenaed, acts as a character witness abuses the prestige of judicial office
to advance the interests of another. See Rule 1.3. Except in unusual circumstances where the demands of justice require,
a judge should discourage a party from requiring the judge to act as a character witness.
[2] This rule does not prohibit judges from writing letters of recommendation in non-adjudicative proceedings
pursuant to Rule 1.3, comments [2] and [3] .
RULE 3.4
Appointments to Governmental Positions
A judge shall not accept appointment to a governmental committee, board, commission, or other governmental position,
unless it is one that concerns the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice. A judge may represent his
or her country, state, or locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with historical, educational, or cultural
activities.
COMMENT
[1] Rule 3.4 implicitly acknowledges the value of judges accepting appointments to entities that concern the
law, the legal system, or the administration of justice. Even in such instances, however, a judge should assess the
appropriateness of accepting an appointment, paying particular attention to the subject matter of the appointment and the
availability and allocation of judicial resources, including the judge's time commitments, and giving due regard to the
requirements of the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.
RULE 3.5
Use of Nonpublic Information
A judge shall not intentionally disclose or use nonpublic information* acquired in a judicial capacity for any purpose
unrelated to the judge's judicial duties.
COMMENT
[1] This rule is not intended to affect a judge's ability to act on information as necessary to protect the
health or safety of any individual if consistent with other provisions of this Code and/or law.
RULE 3.6
Affiliation with Discriminatory Organizations
(A) A judge shall not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the
bases of race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, sexual orientation or other classification protected
by law.
(B) A judge shall not use the benefits or facilities of an organization if the judge knows* or should know
that the organization practices invidious discrimination on one or more of the bases identified in paragraph (A) . A
judge's attendance at an event in a facility of an organization that the judge is not permitted to join is not a
violation of this Rule when the judge's attendance is an isolated event that could not reasonably be perceived as an
endorsement of the organization's practices.
COMMENT
[1] A judge's public manifestation of approval of invidious discrimination on any basis gives rise to the
appearance of impropriety and diminishes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. A
judge's membership in an organization that practices invidious discrimination creates the perception that the judge's
impartiality is impaired.
[2] Whether an organization practices invidious discrimination is a complex question to which judges should
be attentive at all times, given the prevailing state and federal law. The answer cannot be determined from a mere
examination of an organization's current membership rolls, but rather, depends on how the organization selects members,
as well as other relevant factors, such as the organization's purposes or activities, and whether the organization is
dedicated to the preservation or religious, ethnic, or cultural values of legitimate common interest to its members.
[3] If a judge learns that an organization to which the judge belongs engages in invidious discrimination,
the judge must resign immediately from the organization.
[4] A judge's membership in a religious organization as a lawful exercise of the freedom of religion is not
a violation of this Rule.
RULE 3.7
Participation in Educational, Religious, Charitable, Fraternal, or Civic Organizations and Activities
Subject to the requirements of Rule 3.1, a judge may participate in activities sponsored by organizations or governmental
entities concerned with the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice, and those sponsored by or on behalf
of educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations not conducted for profit, including but not
limited to the following activities:
(A) assisting such an organization or entity in planning related to fundraising, and participating in the
management and investment of the organization's or entity's funds, or volunteering services or goods at fundraising
events as long as the situation could not reasonably be deemed coercive;
(B) soliciting* contributions* for such an organization or entity, but only from members of the judge's
family,* or from judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority;
(C) appearing or speaking at, receiving an award or other recognition at, being featured on the program
of, and permitting his or her title to be used in connection with an event of such an organization or entity, but if
the event serves a fundraising purpose, the judge may do so only if the event concerns the law, the legal system, or
the administration of justice;
(D) serving as an officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of such an organization or entity,
unless it is likely that the organization or entity:
(1) will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge; or
(2) will frequently be engaged in adversary proceedings in the court of which the judge is a member,
or in any court subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the court of which the judge is a member.
COMMENT
[1] The activities permitted by Rule 3.7 generally include those sponsored by or undertaken on behalf
of public or private not-for-profit educational institutions, and other not-for-profit organizations, including
law-related, charitable, and other organizations.
[2] Even for law-related organizations, a judge should consider whether the membership and purposes
of the organization, or the nature of the judge's participation in or association with the organization, would
conflict with the judge's obligation to refrain from activities that reflect adversely upon a judge's independence,
integrity, and impartiality.
[3] Mere attendance at an event, whether or not the event serves a fundraising purpose, does not constitute
a violation of paragraph (C) . It is also generally permissible for a judge to serve as an usher or a food server or
preparer, or to perform similar functions, at fundraising events sponsored by educational, religious, charitable,
fraternal, or civic organizations. Such activities are not solicitation and do not present an element of coercion or
abuse the prestige of judicial office.
[4] Identification of a judge's position in educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic
organizations on letterhead used for fundraising or membership solicitation does not violate this Rule. The letterhead
may list the judge's title or judicial office if comparable designations are used for other persons.
[5] In addition to appointing lawyers to serve as counsel for indigent parties in individual cases, a judge
may promote broader access to justice by encouraging lawyers to participate in pro bono legal services, if in doing so
the judge does not employ coercion, or abuse the prestige of judicial office. Such encouragement may take many forms,
including providing lists of available programs, training lawyers to do pro bono legal work, and participating in events
recognizing lawyers who have done pro bono work.
[6] A judge may not directly solicit funds, except as permitted under Rule 3.7(B) , however a judge may
assist a member of the judge's family in their charitable fundraising activities if the procedures employed are not
coercive and the sum is de minimis.
[7] [Reserved.]
[8] A judge may provide leadership in identifying and addressing issues involving equal access to the
justice system; developing public education programs; engaging in activities to promote the fair administration of
justice; and convening, participating or assisting in advisory committees and community collaborations devoted to the
improvement of the law, the legal system, the provision of services, or the administration of justice.
[9] A judge may endorse or participate in projects and programs directly related to the law, the legal
system, the administration of justice, and the provision of services to those coming before the courts, and may actively
support the need for funding of such projects and programs.
RULE 3.8
Appointments to Fiduciary Positions
(A) A judge shall not accept appointment to serve in a fiduciary* position, such as executor, administrator,
trustee, guardian, attorney in fact, or other personal representative, except for the estate, trust, or person of a
member of the judge's family,* and then only if such service will not interfere with the proper performance of judicial
duties.
(B) A judge shall not serve in a fiduciary position if the judge as fiduciary will likely be engaged in
proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge, or if the estate, trust, or ward becomes involved in adversary
proceedings in the court on which the judge serves, or one under its appellate jurisdiction.
(C) A judge acting in a fiduciary capacity shall be subject to the same restrictions on engaging in
financial activities that apply to a judge personally.
(D) If a person who is serving in a fiduciary positi on becomes a judge, he or she must comply with this Rule
as soon as reasonably practicable, but in no event later than one year after becoming a judge.
COMMENT
[1] A judge should recognize that other restrictions imposed by this Code may conflict with a judge's
obligations as a fiduciary; in such circumstances, a judge should resign as fiduciary. For example, serving as a
fiduciary might require frequent disqualification of a judge under Rule 2.11 because a judge is deemed to have an
economic interest in shares of stock held by a trust if the amount of stock held is more than de minimis.
RULE 3.9
Service as Arbitrator or Mediator
A judge shall not act as an arbitrator or a mediator or perform other judicial functions in a private capacity unless
authorized by law.*
COMMENT
[1] This Rule does not prohibit a judge from participating in arbitration, mediation, or settlement
conferences performed as part of assigned judicial duties. Rendering dispute resolution services apart from those
duties, whether or not for economic gain, is prohibited unless it is authorized by law.
[2] Retired, part-time, or pro tempore judges may be exempt from this section. (See Application)
RULE 3.10
Practice of Law
(A) A judge shall not practice law. A judge may act pro se or on behalf of his or her marital community
or domestic partnership and may, without compensation, give legal advice to and draft or review documents for a member
of the judge's family,* but is prohibited from serving as the family member's lawyer in any adjudicative forum.
(B) This rule does not prevent the practice of law pursuant to national or state military service.
COMMENT
[1] A judge may act pro se or on behalf of his or her marital community or domestic partnership in all
legal matters, including matters involving litigation and matters involving appearances before or other dealings with
governmental bodies. A judge must not use the prestige of office to advance the judge's personal or family interests.
See Rule 1.3.
RULE 3.11
Financial, Business, or Remunerative Activities
(A) A judge may hold and manage investments of the judge and members of the judge's family.*
(B) A judge shall not serve as an officer, director, manager, general partner, advisor, or employee of any
business entity except that a judge may manage or participate in:
(1) a business closely held by the judge or members of the judge's family; or
(2) a business entity primarily engaged in investment of the financial resources of the judge or members
of the judge's family.
(C) A judge shall not engage in financial activities permitted under paragraphs (A) and (B) if they will:
(1) interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties;
(2) lead to frequent disqualification of the judge;
(3) involve the judge in frequent transactions or continuing business relationships with lawyers or other
persons likely to come before the court on which the judge serves; or
(4) result in violation of other provisions of this Code.
(D) As soon as practicable without serious financial detriment, the judge must divest himself or herself
of investments and other financial interests that might require frequent disqualification or otherwise violate this Rule.
COMMENT
[1] Judges are generally permitted to engage in financial activities, subject to the requirements of this
Rule and other provisions of this Code. For example, it would be improper for a judge to spend so much time on business
activities that it interferes with the performance of judicial duties. See Rule 2.1. Similarly, it would be improper
for a judge to use his or her official title or appear in judicial robes in business advertising, or to conduct his or
her business or financial affairs in such a way that disqualification is frequently required. See Rules 1.3 and 2.11.
[2] There is a limit of not more than one (1) year allowed to comply with Rule 3.11(D) . (See Application
Part IV)
RULE 3.12
Compensation for Extrajudicial Activities
A judge may accept reasonable compensation for extrajudicial activities permitted by this Code or other law* unless such
acceptance would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge's independence,* integrity,* or impartiality.*
COMMENT
[1] A judge is permitted to accept honoraria, stipends, fees, wages, salaries, royalties, or other
compensation for speaking, teaching, writing, and other extrajudicial activities, provided the compensation is reasonable
and commensurate with the task performed. The judge should be mindful, however, that judicial duties must take
precedence over other activities. See Rule 2.1.
[2] Compensation derived from extrajudicial activities may be subject to public reporting. See
Rule 3.15.
RULE 3.13
Acceptance and Reporting of Gifts, Loans, Bequests, Benefits, or Other Things of Value
(A) A judge shall not accept any gifts, loans, bequests, benefits, or other things of value, if
acceptance is prohibited by law* or would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge's independence,*
integrity,* or impartiality.*
(B) Unless otherwise prohibited by law, or by paragraph (A) , a judge may accept the following:
(1) items with little intrinsic value, such as plaques, certificates, trophies, and greeting cards;
(2) gifts, loans, bequests, benefits, or other things of value from friends, relatives, or other
persons, including lawyers, whose appearance or interest in a proceeding pending* or impending* before the judge
would in any event require disqualification of the judge under Rule 2.11;
(3) ordinary social hospitality;
(4) commercial or financial opportunities and benefits, including special pricing and discounts, and
loans from lending institutions in their regular course of business, if the same opportunities and benefits or loans
are made available on the same terms to similarly situated persons who are not judges;
(5) rewards and prizes given to competitors or participants in random drawings, contests, or other
events that are open to persons who are not judges;
(6) scholarships, fellowships, and similar benefits or awards, if they are available to similarly
situated persons who are not judges, based upon the same terms and criteria;
(7) books, magazines, journals, audiovisual materials, and other resource materials supplied by
publishers on a complimentary basis for official use; or
(8) gifts, awards, or benefits associated with the business, profession, or other separate activity
of a spouse, a domestic partner,* or other family member of a judge residing in the judge's household,* but that
incidentally benefit the judge.
(9) gifts incident to a public testimonial;
(10) invitations to the judge and the judge's spouse, domestic partner, or guest to attend without
charge:
(a) an event associated w ith a bar-related function or other activity relating to the law, the legal
system, or the administration of justice; or
(b) an event associated with any of the judge's educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic
activities permitted by this Code, if the same invitation is offered to nonjudges who are engaged in similar ways in the
activity as is the judge.
COMMENT
[1] Whenever a judge accepts a gift or other thing of value without paying fair market value, there is
a risk that the benefit might be viewed as intended to influence the judge's decision in a case. Rule 3.13 imposes
restrictions upon the acceptance of such benefits. Acceptance of any gift or thing of value may require reporting
pursuant to Rule 3.15 and Washington law.
[2] Gift-giving between friends and relatives is a common occurrence, and ordinarily does not create
an appearance of impropriety or cause reasonable persons to believe that the judge's independence, integrity, or
impartiality has been compromised. In addition, when the appearance of friends or relatives in a case would require the
judge's disqualification under Rule 2.11, there would be no opportunity for a gift to influence the judge's decision
making. Paragraph (B) (2) places no restrictions upon the ability of a judge to accept gifts or other things of value
from friends or relatives under these circumstances.
[3] Businesses and financial institutions frequently make available special pricing, discounts, and
other benefits, either in connection with a temporary promotion or for preferred customers, based upon longevity of the
relationship, volume of business transacted, and other factors. A judge may freely accept such benefits if they are
available to the general public, or if the judge qualifies for the special price or discount according to the same
criteria as are applied to persons who are not judges. As an example, loans provided at generally prevailing interest
rates are not gifts, but a judge could not accept a loan from a financial institution at below-market interest rates
unless the same rate was being made available to the general public for a certain period of time or only to borrowers
with specified qualifications that the judge also possesses.
[4] Rule 3.13 applies only to acceptance of gifts or other things of value by a judge. Nonetheless, if
a gift or other benefit is given to the judge's spouse, domestic partner, or member of the judge's family residing in the
judge's household, it may be viewed as an attempt to evade Rule 3.13 and influence the judge indirectly. Where the gift
or benefit is being made primarily to such other persons, and the judge is merely an incidental beneficiary, this concern
is reduced. A judge should, however, remind family and household members of the restrictions imposed upon judges, and
urge them to take these restrictions into account when making decisions about accepting such gifts or benefits.
[5] Rule 3.13 does not apply to contributions to a judge's campaign for judicial office. Such
contributions are governed by other Rules of this Code, including Rules 4.3 and 4.4.
RULE 3.14
Reimbursement of Expenses and Waivers of Fees or Charges
(A) Unless otherwise prohibited by Rules 3.1 and 3.13(A) or other law,* a judge may accept
reimbursement of necessary and reasonable expenses for travel, food, lodging, or other incidental expenses, or a
waiver or partial waiver of fees or charges for registration, tuition, and similar items, from sources other than
the judge's employing entity, if the expenses or charges are associated with the judge's participation in extrajudicial
activities permitted by this Code.
(B) Reimbursement of expenses for necessary travel, food, lodging, or other incidental expenses shall
be limited to the actual costs reasonably incurred by the judge.
COMMENT
[1] Educational, civic, religious, fraternal, and charitable organizations often sponsor meetings,
seminars, symposia, dinners, awards ceremonies, and similar events. Judges are encouraged to attend educational
programs, as both teachers and participants, in law-related and academic disciplines, in furtherance of their duty
to remain competent in the law. Participation in a variety of other extrajudicial activity is also permitted and
encouraged by this Code.
[2] Not infrequently, sponsoring organizations invite certain judges to attend seminars or other events
on a fee-waived or partial-fee-waived basis, and sometimes include reimbursement for necessary travel, food, lodging, or
other incidental expenses. A judge's decision whether to accept reimbursement of expenses or a waiver or partial waiver
of fees or charges in connection with these or other extrajudicial activities must be based upon an assessment of all the
circumstances. The judge must undertake a reasonable inquiry to obtain the information necessary to make an informed
judgment about whether acceptance would be consistent with the requirements of this Code and Washington law.
[3] A judge must assure himself or herself that acceptance of reimbursement or fee waivers would not
appear to a reasonable person to undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality. The factors that a
judge should consider when deciding whether to accept reimbursement or a fee waiver for attendance at a particular
activity include:
(a) whether the sponsor is an accredited educational institution or bar association rather than a
trade association or a for-profit entity;
(b) whether the funding comes largely from numerous contributors rather than from a single entity
and is earmarked for programs with specific content;
(c) whether the content is related or unrelated to the subject matter of litigation pending or
impending before the judge, or to matters that are likely to come before the judge;
(d) whether the activity is primarily educational rather than recreational, and whether the costs of
the event are reasonable and comparable to those associated with similar events sponsored by the judiciary, bar
associations, or similar groups;
(e) whether information concerning the activity and its funding source(s) is available upon inquiry;
(f) whether the sponsor or source of funding is generally associated with particular parties or
interests currently appearing or likely to appear in the judge's court, thus possibly requiring disqualification of
the judge under Rule 2.11;
(g) whether differing viewpoints are presented; and
(h) whether a broad range of judicial and nonjudicial participants are invited, whether a large
number of participants are invited, and whether the program is designed specifically for judges.
RULE 3.15
Reporting Requirements
A judge shall make such financial disclosures as required by law.
[Adopted effective January 1, 2011.]
CANON 4
A JUDGE OR CANDIDATE FOR JUDICIAL OFFICE SHALL NOT ENGAGE IN POLITICAL OR CAMPAIGN ACTIVITY THAT IS
INCONSISTENT WITH THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, OR IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY.
RULE 4.1
Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial Candidates in General
(A) Except as permitted by law,* or by Rules 4.2 (Political and Campaign Activities of Judicial Candidates in
Public Elections) , 4.3 (Activities of Candidates for Appointive Judicial Office) , and 4.4 (Campaign Committees) , a judge
or a judicial candidate* shall not:
(1) act as a leader in, or hold an office in, a political organization;*
(2) make speeches on behalf of a political organization or nonjudicial candidate;
(3) publicly endorse or oppose a nonjudicial candidate for any public office, except for participation in a
precinct caucus limited to selection of delegates to a nominating convention for the office of President of the United
States pursuant to (5) below.
(4) solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution* to a political organization or a
nonjudicial candidate for public office;
(5) publicly identify himself or herself as a member or a candidate of a political organization, except
(a) as required to vote, or
(b) for participation in a precinct caucus limited to selection of delegates to a nominating convention for
the office of President of the United States.
(6) [Reserved]
(7) personally solicit* or accept campaign contributions other than through a campaign committee authorized
by Rule 4.4, except for members of the judge's family or individuals who have agreed to serve on the campaign committee
authorized by Rule 4.4 and subject to the requirements for campaign committees in Rule 4.4(B) .
(8) use or permit the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit of the judge, the candidate, or
others except as permitted by law;
(9) use court staff, facilities, or other court resources in a campaign for judicial office except as
permitted by law;
(10) knowingly,* or with reckless disregard for the truth, make any false or misleading statement;
(11) make any statement that would reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a
matter pending* or impending* in any court; or
(12) in connection with cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court, make
pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial* performance of the adjudicative duties
of judicial office.
(B) A judge or judicial candidate shall take reasonable measures to ensure that other persons do not
undertake, on behalf of the judge or judicial candidate, any activities prohibited under paragraph (A) .
COMMENT
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
[1] Even when subject to public election, a judge plays a role different from that of a legislator or
executive branch official. Rather than making decisions based upon the expressed views or preferences of the electorate,
a judge makes decisions based upon the law and the facts of every case. Therefore, in furtherance of this interest,
judges and judicial candidates must, to the greatest extent possible, be free and appear to be free from political
influence and political pressure. This Canon imposes narrowly tailored restrictions upon the political and campaign
activities of all judges and judicial candidates, taking into account the various methods of selecting judges.
[2] When a person becomes a judicial candidate, this Canon becomes applicable to his or her conduct.
PARTICIPATION IN POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
[3] Public confidence in the independence and impartiality of the judiciary is eroded if judges or judicial
candidates are perceived to be subject to political influence. Therefore, they are prohibited by paragraph (A) (1) from
assuming leadership roles in political organizations.
[4] Paragraphs (A) (2) and (A) (3) prohibit judges and judicial candidates from making speeches on behalf of
political organizations or publicly endorsing or opposing candidates for nonjudicial public office, respectively, to
prevent them from abusing the prestige of judicial office to advance the interests of others. See Rule 1.3. These
Rules do not prohibit candidates from campaigning on their own behalf, or from endorsing or opposing candidates for
judicial office. See Rule 4.2(B) (2) .
[5] Although members of the families of judges and judicial candidates are free to engage in their own
political activity, including running for public office, there is no "family exception" to the prohibition in
paragraph (A) (3) against a judge or judicial candidate publicly endorsing nonjudicial candidates for public office.
A judge or judicial candidate must not become involved in, or publicly associated with, a family member's political
activity or campaign for public office. To avoid public misunderstanding, judges and judicial candidates should take,
and should urge members of their families to take, reasonable steps to avoid any implication that they are using the
prestige of the their judicial office to endorse any family member's candidacy or other political activity.
[6] Judges and judicial candidates retain the right to participate in the political process as voters in
both primary and general elections. For purposes of this Canon, participation in a caucus-type election procedure does
not constitute public support for or endorsement of a political organization or candidate, is not prohibited by
paragraphs (A) (2) or (A) (3) and is allowed by Paragraphs (A) (2) and (A) (5) . Because Washington uses a caucus system
for selection of delegates to the nominating conventions of the major political parties for the office of President of
the United States, precluding judges and judicial candidates from participating in these caucuses would eliminate their
ability to participate in the selection process for Presidential nominations. Accordingly, Paragraph (A) (3) and (5)
allows judges and judicial candidates to participate in precinct caucuses, limited to selection of delegates to a
nominating convention for the office of President of the United States. This narrowly tailored exception from the
general rule is provided for because of the unique system used in Washington for nomination of Presidential candidates.
If a judge or a judicial candidate participates in a precinct caucus, such person must limit participation to selection
of delegates for various candidates.
STATEMENTS AND COMMENTS MADE DURING A CAMPAIGN FOR JUDICIAL OFFICE
[7] Judicial candidates must be scrupulously fair and accurate in all statements made by them and by their
campaign committees. Paragraph (A) (10) obligates candidates and their committees to refrain from making statements that
are false or misleading, or that omit facts necessary to make the communication considered as a whole not materially
misleading.
[8] Judicial candidates are sometimes the subject of false, misleading, or unfair allegations made by
opposing candidates, third parties, or the media. For example, false or misleading statements might be made regarding
the identity, present position, experience, qualifications, or judicial rulings of a candidate. In other situations,
false or misleading allegations may be made that bear upon a candidate's integrity or fitness for judicial office. As
long as the candidate does not violate paragraphs (A) (10) , (A) (11) , or (A) (12) , the candidate may make a factually
accurate public response. In addition, when an independent third party has made unwarranted attacks on a candidate's
opponent, the candidate may disavow the attacks, and request the third party to cease and desist.
[9] Subject to paragraph (A) (11) , a judicial candid ate is permitted to respond directly to false, misleading,
or unfair allegations made against him or her during a campaign, although it is preferable for someone else to respond if
the allegations relate to a pending case.
[10] Paragraph (A) (11) prohibits judicial candidates from making comments that might impair the fairness of
pending or impending judicial proceedings. This provision does not restrict arguments or statements to the court or jury
by a lawyer who is a judicial candidate, or rulings, statements, or instructions by a judge that may appropriately affect
the outcome of a matter.
PLEDGES, PROMISES, OR COMMITMENTS INCONSISTENT WITH IMPARTIAL PERFORMANCE OF THE ADJUDICATIVE DUTIES
OF JUDICIAL OFFICE
[11] The role of a judge is different from that of a legislator or executive branch official, even when the
judge is subject to public election. Campaigns for judicial office must be conducted differently from campaigns for
other offices. The narrowly drafted restrictions upon political and campaign activities of judicial candidates provided
in Canon 4 allow candidates to conduct campaigns that provide voters with sufficient information to permit them to
distinguish between candidates and make informed electoral choices.
[12] Paragraph (A) (12) makes applicable to both judges and judicial candidates the prohibition that applies
to judges in Rule 2.10(B) , relating to pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial
performance of the adjudicative duties of judicial office.
[13] The making of a pledge, promise, or commitment is not dependent upon, or limited to, the use of any
specific words or phrases; instead, the totality of the statement must be examined to determine if a reasonable person
would believe that the candidate for judicial office has specifically undertaken to reach a particular result. Pledges,
promises, or commitments must be contrasted with statements or announcements of personal views on legal, political, or
other issues, which are not prohibited. When making such statements, a judge should acknowledge the overarching
judicial obligation to apply and uphold the law, without regard to his or her personal views.
[14] A judicial candidate may make campaign promises related to judicial organization, administration, and
court management, such as a promise to dispose of a backlog of cases, start court sessions on time, or avoid favoritism
in appointments and hiring. A candidate may also pledge to take action outside the courtroom, such as working toward an
improved jury selection system, or advocating for more funds to improve the physical plant and amenities of the
courthouse.
[15] Judicial candidates may receive questionnaires or requests for interviews from the media and from issue
advocacy or other community organizations that seek to learn their views on disputed or controversial legal or political
issues. Paragraph (A) (12) does not specifically address judicial responses to such inquiries. Depending upon the
wording and format of such questionnaires, candidates' responses might be viewed as pledges, promises, or commitments to
perform the adjudicative duties of office other than in an impartial way. To avoid violating paragraph (A) (12) ,
therefore, candidates who respond to media and other inquiries should also give assurances that they will keep an open
mind and will carry out their adjudicative duties faithfully and impartially if elected. Candidates who do respond to
questionnaires should post the questionnaire and their substantive answers so they are accessible to the general public.
Candidates who do not respond may state their reasons for not responding, such as the danger that answering might be
perceived by a reasonable person as undermining a successful candidate's independence or impartiality, or that it might
lead to frequent disqualification. See Rule 2.11.
PERSONAL SOLICITATION OF CAMPAIGN FUNDS
[16] Judicial candidates should be particularly cautious in regard to personal solicitation of campaign funds.
This can be perceived as being coercive and an abuse of judicial office. Accordingly, a general prohibition on personal
solicitation is retained with a narrowly tailored exception contained in Paragraph (A) (7) for members of the judge's
family and those who have agreed to serve on the judge's campaign committee. These types of individuals generally have
a close personal relationship to the judicial candidate and therefore the concerns of coercion or abuse of judicial
office are greatly diminished. Judicial candidates should not use this limited exception as a basis for attempting to
skirt the general prohibition against solicitation of campaign contributions.
RULE 4.2
Political and Campaign Activities of Judicial Candidates in Public Elections
(A) A judicial candidate* in a nonpartisan, public election* shall:
(1) Act at all times in a manner consistent with the independence,* integrity,* and impartiality* of the
judiciary;
(2) comply with all applicable election, election campaign, and election campaign fund-raising laws and
regulations of this jurisdiction;
(3) review and approve the content of all campaign statements and materials produced by the candidate or
his or her campaign committee, as authorized by Rule 4.4, before their dissemination; and
(4) take reasonable measures to ensure that other persons do not undertake on behalf of the candidate
activities, other than those described in Rule 4.4, that the candidate is prohibited from doing by Rule 4.1.
(B) A candidate for elective judicial office may:
(1) establish a campaign committee pursuant to the provisions of Rule 4.4;
(2) speak on behalf of his or her candidacy through any medium, including but not limited to advertisements,
websites, or other campaign literature;
(3) seek, accept, or use endorsements from any person or organization.
COMMENT
[1] Paragraphs (B) permits judicial candidates in public elections to engage in some political and campaign
activities otherwise prohibited by Rule 4.1.
[2] Despite paragraph (B), judicial candidates for public election remain subject to many of the provisions
of Rule 4.1. For example, a candidate continues to be prohibited from soliciting funds for a political organization,
knowingly making false or misleading statements during a campaign, or making certain promises, pledges, or commitments
related to future adjudicative duties. See Rule 4.1(A) , paragraphs (4) , (10) , and (12) .
[3] Judicial candidates are permitted to attend or purchase tickets for dinners and other events sponsored by
political organizations on behalf of their own candidacy or that of another judicial candidate.
[4] In endorsing or opposing another candidate for judicial office, a judicial candidate must abide by the
same rules governing campaign conduct and speech as apply to the candidate's own campaign.
[5] Although judicial candidates in nonpartisan public elections are prohibited from running on a ticket
or slate associated with a political organization, they may group themselves into slates or other alliances to conduct
their campaigns more effectively.
RULE 4.3
Activities of Candidates for Appointive Judicial Office
A candidate for appointment to judicial office may:
(A) communicate with the appointing or confirming authority, including any selection, screening, or
nominating commission or similar agency; and
(B) seek endorsements for the appointment from any person or organization.
COMMENT
[1] When seeking support or endorsement, or when communicating directly with an appointing or confirming
authority, a candidate for a ppointive judicial office must not make any pledges, promises, or commitments that are
inconsistent with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of the office. See Rule 4.1(A) (12) .
RULE 4.4
Campaign Committees
(A) A judicial candidate* subject to public election* may establish a campaign committee to manage and
conduct a campaign for the candidate, subject to the provisions of this Code. The candidate is responsible for
ensuring that his or her campaign committee complies with applicable provisions of this Code and other applicable law.*
(B) A judicial candidate subject to public election shall direct his or her campaign committee:
(1) to solicit and accept only such campaign contributions* as are reasonable, in any event not to exceed,
in the aggregate amount allowed as provided for by law;
(2) not to solicit contributions for a candidate's current campaign more than 120 days before the date
when filing for that office is first permitted and may accept contributions after the election only as permitted
by law; and
(3) to comply with all applicable statutory requirements for disclosure and divestiture of campaign
contributions, and to file with the Public Disclosure Commission all reports as required by law.
COMMENT
[1] Judicial candidates are generally prohibited from personally soliciting campaign contributions
or personally accepting campaign contributions. See Rule 4.1(A) (7) . This Rule recognizes that judicial candidates
must raise campaign funds to support their candidacies, and permits candidates, other than candidates for appointive
judicial office, to establish campaign committees to solicit and accept reasonable financial contributions or
in-kind contributions.
[2] Campaign committees may solicit and accept campaign contributions, manage the expenditure of
campaign funds, and generally conduct campaigns. Candidates are responsible for compliance with the requirements
of election law and other applicable law, and for the activities of their campaign committees.
RULE 4.5
Activities of Judges Who Become Candidates for Nonjudicial Office
(A) Upon becoming a candidate for a nonjudicial elective office, a judge shall resign from
judicial office, unless permitted by law* to continue to hold judicial office.
(B) Upon becoming a candidate for a nonjudicial appointive office, a judge is not required to resign
from judicial office, provided that the judge complies with the other provisions of this Code.
COMMENT
[1] In campaigns for nonjudicial elective public office, candidates may make pledges, promises, or
commitments related to positions they would take and ways they would act if elected to office. Although appropriate
in nonjudicial campaigns, this manner of campaigning is inconsistent with the role of a judge, who must remain fair
and impartial to all who come before him or her. The potential for misuse of the judicial office, and the political
promises that the judge would be compelled to make in the course of campaigning for nonjudicial elective office,
together dictate that a judge who wishes to run for such an office must resign upon becoming a candidate.
[2] The "resign to run" rule set forth in paragraph (A) ensures that a judge cannot use the judicial
office to promote his or her candidacy, and prevents post-campaign retaliation from the judge in the event the judge
is defeated in the election. When a judge is seeking appointive nonjudicial office, however, the dangers are not
sufficient to warrant imposing the "resign to run" rule.
[Adopted effective January 1, 2011.]