Guide to Judiciary Policy 

Vol 2: Ethics and Judicial Conduct 

Pt A: Codes of Conduct

Ch 2: Code of Conduct for United States Judges

Introduction

Canon 1: A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary

Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in 

All Activities 

Canon 3: A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and 

Diligently

Canon 4: A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities That Are Consistent with 

the Obligations of Judicial Office

Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain from Political Activity

Compliance with the Code of Conduct 

Applicable Date of Compliance

Introduction

The Code of Conduct for United States Judges was initially adopted by the Judicial 

Conference on April 5, 1973, and was known as the "Code of Judicial Conduct for 

United States Judges." See: JCUS-APR 73, pp. 9-11. Since then, the Judicial 

Conference has made the following changes to the Code:

• March 1987: deleted the word "Judicial" from the name of the Code;

• September 1992: adopted substantial revisions to the Code;

• March 1996: revised part C of the Compliance section, immediately 

following the Code;

• September 1996: revised Canons 3C(3)(a) and 5C(4);

• September 1999: revised Canon 3C(1)(c);

• September 2000: clarified the Compliance section;

• March 2009: adopted substantial revisions to the Code;

Last revised (Transmittal 02-016) March 20, 2014

DRAFT -- 9.13.2018
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 2

• March 2014: revised part C of the Compliance section, which 

appears below, immediately following the Code.

This Code applies to United States circuit judges, district judges, Court of 

International Trade judges, Court of Federal Claims judges, bankruptcy judges, and 

magistrate judges. Certain provisions of this Code apply to special masters and 

commissioners as indicated in the “Compliance” section. The Tax Court, Court of 

Appeals for Veterans Claims, and Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces have 

adopted this Code.

The Judicial Conference has authorized its Committee on Codes of Conduct to 

render advisory opinions about this Code only when requested by a judge to whom 

this Code applies. Requests for opinions and other questions concerning this Code 

and its applicability should be addressed to the Chair of the Committee on Codes of 

Conduct by email or as follows:

Chair, Committee on Codes of Conduct 

c/o General Counsel

Administrative Office of the United States 

Courts Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary 

Building One Columbus Circle, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20544

202-502-1100

Procedural questions may be addressed to: 

Office of the General Counsel

Administrative Office of the United States 

Courts Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary 

Building One Columbus Circle, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20544

202-502-1100

CANON 1: A JUDGE SHOULD UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND 

INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY

An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our 

society. A judge should maintain and enforce high standards of conduct and should 

personally observe those standards, so that the integrity and independence of the 

judiciary may be preserved. The provisions of this Code should be construed and 

applied to further that objective.
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 3

COMMENTARY

Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends on public 

confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and 

independence of judges depend in turn on their acting without fear or favor. 

Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law and should 

comply with this Code. Adherence to this responsibility helps to maintain public 

confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. Conversely, violation of this Code 

diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and injures our system of government 

under law.

The Canons are rules of reason. They should be applied consistently with 

constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules and decisional law, and in the 

context of all relevant circumstances. The Code is to be construed so it does not 

impinge on the essential independence of judges in making judicial decisions.

The Code is designed to provide guidance to judges and nominees for judicial 

office. It may also provide standards of conduct for application in proceedings under 

the Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (28

U.S.C.

§§ 332(d)(1), 351-364). Not every violation of the Code should lead to disciplinary 

action. Whether disciplinary action is appropriate, and the degree of discipline, 

should be determined through a reasonable application of the text and should 

depend on such factors as the seriousness of the improper activity, the intent of the 

judge, whether there is a pattern of improper activity, and the effect of the improper

activity on others or on the judicial system. Many of the restrictions in the Code are

necessarily cast in general terms, and judges may reasonably differ in their 

interpretation. Furthermore, the Code is not designed or intended as a basis for civil 

liability or criminal prosecution. Finally, the Code is not intended to be used for 

tactical advantage.

CANON 2: A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE

APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES

A. Respect for Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law and 

should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in

the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

B. Outside Influence. A judge should not allow family, social, political, 

financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or 

judgment. A judge should neither lend the prestige of the judicial 

office to advance the private interests of the judge or others nor 

convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a 

special position to influence the judge. A judge should not testify

voluntarily as a character witness.
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 4

C. Nondiscriminatory Membership. A judge should not hold membership 

in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis 

of race, sex, religion, or national origin.

COMMENTARY

Canon 2A. An appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds, with 

knowledge of all the relevant circumstances disclosed by a reasonable inquiry, would 

conclude that the judge’s honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to

serve as a judge is impaired. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by 

irresponsible or improper conduct by judges, including harassment and other 

inappropriate workplace behavior. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance 

of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A 

judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and 

willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.

Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the prohibition is necessarily 

cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not 

specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include 

violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of this Code.

Canon 2B. Testimony as a character witness injects the prestige of the 

judicial office into the proceeding in which the judge testifies and may be perceived 

as an official testimonial. A judge should discourage a party from requiring the judge 

to testify as a character witness except in unusual circumstances when the demands 

of justice require. This Canon does not create a privilege against testifying in 

response to an official summons.

A judge should avoid lending the prestige of judicial office to advance the 

private interests of the judge or others. For example, a judge should not use the 

judge’s judicial position or title to gain advantage in litigation involving a friend or a 

member of the judge’s family. In contracts for publication of a judge’s writings, a judge 

should retain control over the advertising to avoid exploitation of the judge’s office.

A judge should be sensitive to possible abuse of the prestige of office. A judge 

should not initiate communications to a sentencing judge or a probation or corrections 

officer but may provide information to such persons in response to a formal request. 

Judges may participate in the process of judicial selection by cooperating with 

appointing authorities and screening committees seeking names for consideration 

and by responding to official inquiries concerning a person being considered for a 

judgeship.

Canon 2C. Membership of a judge in an organization that practices invidious 

discrimination gives rise to perceptions that the judge’s impartiality is impaired. 

Canon 2C refers to the current practices of the organization. Whether an 

organization practices invidious discrimination is often a complex question to which 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 5

judges should be sensitive. 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 and other relevant factors, such as that the 

organization is dedicated to the preservation of religious, ethnic or cultural values of 

legitimate common interest to its members, or that it is in fact and effect an intimate, 

purely private organization whose membership limitations could not be 

constitutionally prohibited. See New York State Club Ass’n. Inc. v. City of New York, 

487 U.S. 1, 108 S. Ct. 2225, 101 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1988); Board of Directors of Rotary

International v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537, 107 S. Ct. 1940, 95 L. Ed. 2d 

474 (1987); Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 104 S. Ct. 3244, 82 L.

Ed. 2d 462 (1984). Other relevant factors include the size and nature of the 

organization and the diversity of persons in the locale who might reasonably be 

considered potential members. Thus the mere absence of diverse membership does 

not by itself demonstrate a violation unless reasonable persons with knowledge of all 

the relevant circumstances would expect that the membership would be diverse in the 

absence of invidious discrimination. Absent such factors, an organization is generally 

said to discriminate invidiously if it arbitrarily excludes from membership on the basis 

of race, religion, sex, or national origin persons who would otherwise be admitted to 

membership.

Although Canon 2C relates only to membership in organizations that 

invidiously discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religion or national origin, a judge’s 

membership in an organization that engages in any invidiously discriminatory 

membership practices prohibited by applicable law violates Canons 2 and 2A and 

gives the appearance of impropriety. In addition, it would be a violation of Canons 2 

and 2A for a judge to arrange a meeting at a club that the judge knows practices 

invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin in its 

membership or other policies, or for the judge to use such a club regularly. 

Moreover, public manifestation by a judge of the judge’s knowing approval of 

invidious discrimination on any basis gives the appearance of impropriety under 

Canon 2 and diminishes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the 

judiciary, in violation of Canon 2A.

When a judge determines that an organization to which the judge belongs 

engages in invidious discrimination that would preclude membership under Canon 2C 

or under Canons 2 and 2A, the judge is permitted, in lieu of resigning, to make 

immediate and continuous efforts to have the organization discontinue its invidiously 

discriminatory practices. If the organization fails to discontinue its invidiously 

discriminatory practices as promptly as possible (and in all events within two years of 

the judge’s first learning of the practices), the judge should resign immediately from 

the organization.
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 6

CANON 3: A JUDGE SHOULD PERFORM THE DUTIES OF THE OFFICE 

FAIRLY, IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY

The duties of judicial office take precedence over all other activities. In 

performing the duties prescribed by law, The judge should perform those duties with 

respect for others, and should not engage in behavior that is harassing, abusive, 

prejudiced, or biased. tThe judge should adhere to the following standards:

A. Adjudicative Responsibilities.

(1) A judge should be faithful to, and maintain professional 

competence in, the law and should not be swayed by 

partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.

(2) A judge should hear and decide matters assigned, unless 

disqualified, and should maintain order and decorum in all 

judicial proceedings.

(3) A judge should be patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous 

to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom 

the judge deals in an official capacity. A judge should require 

similar conduct of by those subject to the judge’s control, 

including lawyers to the extent consistent with their role in the 

adversary process.

(4) A judge should accord to every person who has a legal interest 

in a proceeding, and that person’s lawyer, the full right to be 

heard according to law. Except as set out below, a judge should 

not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications or 

consider other communications concerning a pending or 

impending matter that are made outside the presence of the 

parties or their lawyers. If a judge receives an unauthorized ex 

parte communication bearing on the substance of a matter, the 

judge should promptly notify the parties of the subject matter of 

the communication and allow the parties an opportunity to 

respond, if requested. A judge may:

(a) initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications 

as authorized by law;

(b) when circumstances require it, permit ex parte 

communication for scheduling, administrative, or 

emergency purposes, but only if the ex parte 

communication does not address substantive matters and 

the judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 7

procedural, substantive, or tactical advantage as a result 

of the ex parte communication;

(c) obtain the written advice of a disinterested expert on the 

law, but only after giving advance notice to the parties of 

the person to be consulted and the subject matter of the 

advice and affording the parties reasonable opportunity to 

object and respond to the notice and to the advice 

received; or

(d) with the consent of the parties, confer separately with 

the parties and their counsel in an effort to mediate or 

settle pending matters.

(5) A judge should dispose promptly of the business of the court.

(6) A judge should not make public comment on the merits of a 

matter pending or impending in any court. A judge should 

require similar restraint by court personnel subject to the judge’s 

direction and control. The prohibition on public comment on the 

merits does not extend to public statements made in the course 

of the judge’s official duties, to explanations of court procedures, 

or to scholarly presentations made for purposes of legal 

education.

B. Administrative Responsibilities.

(1) A judge should diligently discharge administrative 

responsibilities, maintain professional competence in judicial 

administration, and facilitate the performance of the 

administrative responsibilities of other judges and court 

personnel.

(2) A judge should not direct court personnel to engage in conduct 

on the judge’s behalf or as the judge’s representative when that 

conduct would contravene the Code if undertaken by the judge.

(3) A judge should exercise the power of appointment fairly and 

only on the basis of merit, avoiding unnecessary 

appointments, nepotism, and favoritism. A judge should not 

approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of 

services rendered.

(4) A judge should practice civility, by being patient, dignified, 

respectful, and courteous, in dealings with court personnel, 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 8

including chambers staff. A judge should not engage in any form 

of harassment of court personnel. A judge should not engage in 

retaliation for reporting of allegations of such misconduct. A 

judge should seek to hold court personnel who are subject to the 

judge’s control to similar standards in their own dealings with 

other court personnel.

(4)(5) A judge with supervisory authority over other judges should take 

reasonable measures to ensure that they perform their duties 

timely and effectively.

(5)(6) A judge should take appropriate action upon learning of 

reliable evidence indicating the likelihood that a judge’s 

conduct contravened this Code, that a judicial employee’s 

conduct contravened the Code of Conduct for Judicial 

Employees, or that a lawyer violated applicable rules of 

professional conduct.

C. Disqualification.

(1) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in 

which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, 

including but not limited to instances in which:

(a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a 

party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary 

facts concerning the proceeding;

(b) the judge served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, 

or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law 

served during such association as a lawyer concerning 

the matter, or the judge or lawyer has been a material 

witness;

(c) the judge knows that the judge, individually or as a 

fiduciary, or the judge’s spouse or minor child residing in 

the judge’s household, has a financial interest in the 

subject matter in controversy or in a party to the 

proceeding, or any other interest that could be affected 

substantially by the outcome of the proceeding;

(d) the judge or the judge’s spouse, or a person related to 

either within the third degree of relationship, or the spouse 

of such a person is:
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 9

(i) a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director,

or trustee of a party;

(ii) acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;

(iii) known by the judge to have an interest that could 

be substantially affected by the outcome of the 

proceeding; or

(iv) to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a 

material witness in the proceeding;

(e) the judge has served in governmental employment and 

in that capacity participated as a judge (in a previous 

judicial position), counsel, advisor, or material witness 

concerning the proceeding or has expressed an opinion 

concerning the merits of the particular case in 

controversy.

(2) A judge should keep informed about the judge’s personal and 

fiduciary financial interests and make a reasonable effort to 

keep informed about the personal financial interests of the 

judge’s spouse and minor children residing in the judge’s 

household.

(3) For the purposes of this section:

(a) the degree of relationship is calculated according to the 

civil law system; the following relatives are within the third 

degree of relationship: parent, child, grandparent, 

grandchild, great grandparent, great grandchild, sister, 

brother, aunt, uncle, niece, and nephew; the listed 

relatives include whole and half blood relatives and most 

step relatives;

(b) “fiduciary” includes such relationships as 

executor, administrator, trustee, and guardian;

(c) “financial interest” means ownership of a legal or equitable 

interest, however small, or a relationship as director, 

advisor, or other active participant in the affairs of a party,

except that:

(i) ownership in a mutual or common investment 

fund that holds securities is not a “financial 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 10

interest” in such securities unless the judge 

participates in the management of the fund;

(ii) an office in an educational, religious, 

charitable, fraternal, or civic organization is 

not a “financial interest” in securities held by 

the organization;

(iii) the proprietary interest of a policyholder in a 

mutual insurance company, or a depositor in a 

mutual savings association, or a similar 

proprietary interest, is a “financial interest” in the 

organization only if the outcome of the 

proceeding could substantially affect the value of 

the interest;

(iv) ownership of government securities is a “financial 

interest” in the issuer only if the outcome of the 

proceeding could substantially affect the value of 

the securities;

(d) “proceeding” includes pretrial, trial, appellate review, or 

other stages of litigation.

(4) Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this Canon, if a 

judge would be disqualified because of a financial interest in a 

party (other than an interest that could be substantially affected 

by the outcome), disqualification is not required if the judge (or 

the judge’s spouse or minor child) divests the interest that

provides the grounds for disqualification.

D. Remittal of Disqualification. Instead of withdrawing from the 

proceeding, a judge disqualified by Canon 3C(1) may, except in the 

circumstances specifically set out in subsections (a) through (e), 

disclose on the record the basis of disqualification. The judge may 

participate in the proceeding if, after that disclosure, the parties and 

their lawyers have an opportunity to confer outside the presence of the 

judge, all agree in writing or on the record that the judge should not be 

disqualified, and the judge is then willing to participate. The agreement 

should be incorporated in the record of the proceeding.

COMMENTARY

Canon 3A(3). The duty to hear all proceedings fairly and with patience is not 

inconsistent with the duty to dispose promptly of the business of the court. Courts 

can be efficient and businesslike while being patient and deliberate.
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 11

The duty under Canon 2 to act in a manner that promotes public confidence in 

the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary applies to all the judge’s activities, 

including the discharge of the judge’s adjudicative and administrative responsibilities. 

The duty to be respectful includes the responsibility to avoid comment or behavior 

that could reasonably be interpreted as harassment, prejudice or bias.

Canon 3A(4). The restriction on ex parte communications concerning a 

proceeding includes communications from lawyers, law teachers, and others who are 

not participants in the proceeding. A judge may consult with other judges or with 

court personnel whose function is to aid the judge in carrying out adjudicative 

responsibilities. A judge should make reasonable efforts to ensure that law clerks and 

other court personnel comply with this provision.

A judge may encourage and seek to facilitate settlement but should not act in 

a manner that coerces any party into surrendering the right to have the controversy 

resolved by the courts.

Canon 3A(5). In disposing of matters promptly, efficiently, and fairly, a judge 

must demonstrate due regard for the rights of the parties to be heard and to have 

issues resolved without unnecessary cost or delay. A judge should monitor and 

supervise cases to reduce or eliminate dilatory practices, avoidable delays, and 

unnecessary costs.

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 

personnel, litigants, and their lawyers cooperate with the judge to that end.

Canon 3A(6). The admonition against public comment about the merits of a 

pending or impending matter continues until the appellate process is complete. If the 

public comment involves a case from the judge’s own court, the judge should take 

particular care so that the comment does not denigrate public confidence in the 

judiciary’s integrity and impartiality, which would violate Canon 2A. A judge may 

comment publicly on proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity, 

but not on mandamus proceedings when the judge is a litigant in an official capacity 

(but the judge may respond in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 21(b)).

Canon 3B(3). A judge’s appointees include assigned counsel, officials such 

as referees, commissioners, special masters, receivers, guardians, and personnel 

such as law clerks, secretaries, and judicial assistants. Consent by the parties to an 

appointment or an award of compensation does not relieve the judge of the obligation 

prescribed by this subsection.

Canon 3B(4). A judge should neither engage in, nor tolerate, workplace 

conduct that is reasonably interpreted as harassment, abusive behavior, or retaliation 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 12

for reporting such conduct. The duty to refrain from retaliation reaches retaliation 

against former as well as current judiciary personnel. 

Under this Canon, harassment encompasses a range of conduct having no 

legitimate role in the workplace, including harassment that constitutes discrimination 

on impermissible grounds and other abusive, oppressive, or inappropriate conduct 

directed at judicial employees or others. See also Rules for Judicial-Conduct and 

Judicial-Disability Proceedings, Rule 4(a)(2) (providing that “cognizable misconduct 

includes: (A) engaging in unwanted, offensive, or abusive sexual conduct, including 

sexual harassment or assault; (B) treating litigants, attorneys, judicial employees, or 

others in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner; or (C) creating a hostile work 

environment for judicial employees”) and Rule 4(a)(3) (providing that “cognizable 

misconduct includes discrimination on the basis of race, sex, gender, gender identity, 

pregnancy, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, age, or disability”).

Canon 3B(65). Public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the 

judiciary is promoted when judges take appropriate action based on reliable evidence 

of likely misconduct. Appropriate action depends on the circumstances, but the 

overarching goal of such action should be to prevent harm to those affected by the 

misconduct and to prevent recurrence. A judge, in deciding what action is 

appropriate, may take into account any request for confidentiality made by a person 

complaining of or reporting misconduct. See also Rules for Judicial-Conduct and 

Judicial-Disability Proceedings, Rule 4(a)(6) (providing that “cognizable misconduct 

includes failing to call to the attention of the relevant chief district judge and chief 

circuit judge information reasonably likely to constitute judicial misconduct or 

disability. A judge who receives such information shall respect a request for 

confidentiality but shall disclose the information to the chief district judge and chief 

circuit judge, who shall also treat the information as confidential. Some information 

will be protected from disclosure by statute or rule. A judge’s promise of 

confidentiality may necessarily yield when there is information of misconduct that is 

serious or egregious and thus threatens the integrity and proper functioning of the 

Judiciary. This duty to report is included within every judge’s obligation to assist in 

addressing allegations of misconduct or disability and to take appropriate corrective 

action as necessary”).

Appropriate action may include direct communication with the judge or lawyer, 

other direct action if available, reporting the conduct to the appropriate authorities, or, 

when the judge believes that a judge’s or lawyer’s conduct is caused by drugs, 

alcohol, or a medical condition, making a confidential referral to an assistance 

program. Appropriate action may also include responding to a subpoena to testify or

otherwise cooperating with or participating in judicial or lawyer disciplinary 

proceedings; a judge should be candid and honest with disciplinary authorities.

Canon 3C. Recusal considerations applicable to a judge’s spouse should also 

be considered with respect to a person other than a spouse with whom the judge 

maintains both a household and an intimate relationship.
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 13

Canon 3C(1)(c). In a criminal proceeding, a victim entitled to restitution is not, 

within the meaning of this Canon, a party to the proceeding or the subject matter in 

controversy. A judge who has a financial interest in the victim of a crime is not 

required by Canon 3C(1)(c) to disqualify from the criminal proceeding, but the judge 

must do so if the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned under Canon 

3C(1) or if the judge has an interest that could be substantially affected by the 

outcome of the proceeding under Canon 3C(1)(d)(iii).

Canon 3C(1)(d)(ii). 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 of itself disqualify the 

judge. However, if “the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned” under

Canon 3C(1), or the relative is known by the judge to have an interest in the law 

firm that could be “substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding” under 

Canon 3C(1)(d)(iii), the judge’s disqualification is required.

CANON 4: A JUDGE MAY ENGAGE IN EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITIES THAT 

ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE OBLIGATIONS OF JUDICIAL 

OFFICE

A judge may engage in extrajudicial activities, including law-related pursuits and 

civic, charitable, educational, religious, social, financial, fiduciary, and governmental 

activities, and may speak, write, lecture, and teach on both law-related and nonlegal 

subjects. However, a judge should not participate in extrajudicial activities that detract 

from the dignity of the judge’s office, interfere with the performance of the judge’s 

official duties, reflect adversely on the judge’s impartiality, lead to frequent 

disqualification, or violate the limitations set forth below.

A. Law-related Activities.

(1) Speaking, Writing, and Teaching. A judge may speak, write, 

lecture, teach, and participate in other activities concerning the 

law, the legal system, and the administration of justice.

(2) Consultation. A judge may consult with or appear at a 

public hearing before an executive or legislative body or 

official:

(a) on matters concerning the law, the legal system, or 

the administration of justice;

(b) to the extent that it would generally be perceived that a 

judge’s judicial experience provides special expertise in 

the area; or
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 14

(c) when the judge is acting pro se in a matter involving 

the judge or the judge’s interest.

(3) Organizations. A judge may participate in and serve as a 

member, officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of a 

nonprofit organization devoted to the law, the legal system, or 

the administration of justice and may assist such an organization 

in the management and investment of funds. A judge may make 

recommendations to public and private fund-granting agencies 

about projects and programs concerning the law, the legal 

system, and the administration of justice.

(4) Arbitration and Mediation. A judge should not act as an 

arbitrator or mediator or otherwise perform judicial functions 

apart from the judge’s official duties unless expressly 

authorized by law.

(5) Practice of Law. A judge should not practice law and should 

not serve as a family member’s lawyer in any forum. A judge 

may, however, act pro se and may, without compensation, 

give legal advice to and draft or review documents for a 

member of the judge’s family.

B. Civic and Charitable Activities. A judge may participate in and serve as 

an officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of a nonprofit civic, 

charitable, educational, religious, or social organization, subject to the 

following limitations:

(1) A judge should not serve if it is likely that the organization will 

either be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come 

before the judge or be regularly engaged in adversary 

proceedings in any court.

(2) A judge should not give investment advice to such an 

organization but may serve on its board of directors or trustees 

even though it has the responsibility for approving investment 

decisions.

C. Fund Raising. A judge may assist nonprofit law-related, civic, 

charitable, educational, religious, or social organizations in planning 

fund-raising activities and may be listed as an officer, director, or 

trustee. A judge may solicit funds for such an organization from judges 

over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate 

authority and from members of the judge’s family. Otherwise, a judge 

should not personally participate in fund-raising activities, solicit funds 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 15

for any organization, or use or permit the use of the prestige of judicial 

office for that purpose. A judge should not personally participate in 

membership solicitation if the solicitation might reasonably be perceived

as coercive or is essentially a fund-raising mechanism.

D. Financial Activities.

(1) A judge may hold and manage investments, including real 

estate, and engage in other remunerative activity, but should 

refrain from financial and business dealings that exploit the 

judicial position or 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.

(2) A judge may serve as an officer, director, active partner, 

manager, advisor, or employee of a business only if the business 

is closely held and controlled by members of the judge’s family. 

For this purpose, “members of the judge’s family” means 

persons related to the judge or the judge’s spouse within the 

third degree of relationship as defined in Canon 3C(3)(a), any 

other relative with whom the judge or the judge’s spouse 

maintains a close familial relationship, and the spouse of any of 

the foregoing.

(3) As soon as the judge can do so without serious financial 

detriment, the judge should divest investments and other 

financial interests that might require frequent disqualification.

(4) A judge should comply with the restrictions on acceptance of 

gifts and the prohibition on solicitation of gifts set forth in the 

Judicial Conference Gift Regulations. A judge should endeavor 

to prevent any member of the judge’s family residing in the 

household from soliciting or accepting a gift except to the extent 

that a judge would be permitted to do so by the Judicial 

Conference Gift Regulations. A “member of the judge’s family” 

means any relative of a judge by blood, adoption, or marriage, or 

any person treated by a judge as a member of the judge’s 

family.

(5) A judge should not disclose or use nonpublic information 

acquired in a judicial capacity for any purpose unrelated to the 

judge’s official duties.

E. Fiduciary Activities. A judge may serve as the executor, administrator, 

trustee, guardian, or other fiduciary only for the estate, trust, or person 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 16

of a member of the judge’s family as defined in Canon 4D(4). As a

family fiduciary a judge is subject to the following restrictions:

(1) The judge should not serve if it is likely that as a fiduciary the 

judge would 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.

(2) While acting as a fiduciary, a judge is subject to the 

same restrictions on financial activities that apply to the 

judge in a personal capacity.

F. Governmental Appointments. A judge may accept appointment to a 

governmental committee, commission, or other position only if it is one 

that concerns the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice, 

or if appointment of a judge is required by federal statute. A judge 

should not, in any event, accept such an appointment if the judge’s 

governmental duties would tend to undermine the public confidence in 

the integrity, impartiality, or independence of the judiciary. A judge may 

represent the judge’s country, state, or locality on ceremonial occasions 

or in connection with historical, educational, and cultural activities.

G. Chambers, Resources, and Staff. A judge should not to any substantial 

degree use judicial chambers, resources, or staff to engage in 

extrajudicial activities permitted by this Canon.

H. Compensation, Reimbursement, and Financial Reporting. A judge 

may accept compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the 

law-related and extrajudicial activities permitted by this Code if the 

source of the payments does not give the appearance of influencing 

the judge in the judge’s judicial duties or otherwise give the 

appearance of impropriety, subject to the following restrictions:

(1) Compensation should not exceed a reasonable amount nor 

should it exceed what a person who is not a judge would

receive for the same activity.

(2) Expense reimbursement should be limited to the actual costs 

of travel, food, and lodging reasonably incurred by the judge 

and, where appropriate to the occasion, by the judge’s 

spouse or relative. Any additional payment is compensation.

(3) A judge should make required financial disclosures, including 

disclosures of gifts and other things of value, in compliance 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 17

with applicable statutes and Judicial Conference regulations 

and directives.

COMMENTARY

Canon 4. Complete separation of a judge from extrajudicial activities is neither 

possible nor wise; a judge should not become isolated from the society in which the 

judge lives. As a judicial officer and a person specially learned in the law, a judge is in 

a unique position to contribute to the law, the legal system, and the administration of 

justice, including revising substantive and procedural law and improving criminal and 

juvenile justice. To the extent that the judge’s time permits and impartiality is not 

compromised, the judge is encouraged to do so, either independently or through a bar 

association, judicial conference, or other organization dedicated to the law. Subject to 

the same limitations, judges may also engage in a wide range of non-law-related 

activities.

Within the boundaries of applicable law (see, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 953) a judge 

may express opposition to the persecution of lawyers and judges anywhere in the 

world if the judge has ascertained, after reasonable inquiry, that the persecution is 

occasioned by conflict between the professional responsibilities of the persecuted 

judge or lawyer and the policies or practices of the relevant government.

A person other than a spouse with whom the judge maintains both a 

household and an intimate relationship should be considered a member of the 

judge’s family for purposes of legal assistance under Canon 4A(5), fund raising under 

Canon 4C, and family business activities under Canon 4D(2).

Canon 4A. Teaching and serving on the board of a law school are permissible, 

but in the case of a for-profit law school, board service is limited to a nongoverning 

advisory board.

Consistent with this Canon, a judge may encourage lawyers to provide pro 

bono legal services.

Canon 4A(4). This Canon generally prohibits a judge from mediating a state 

court matter, except in unusual circumstances (e.g., when a judge is mediating a 

federal matter that cannot be resolved effectively without addressing the related state 

court matter).

Canon 4A(5). A judge may act pro se in all legal matters, including 

matters involving litigation and matters involving appearances before or other 

dealings with governmental bodies. In so doing, a judge must not abuse the 

prestige of office to advance the interests of the judge or the judge’s family.

Canon 4B. The changing nature of some organizations and their exposure 

to litigation make it necessary for a judge regularly to reexamine the activities of 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 18

each organization with which the judge is affiliated to determine if the judge’s 

continued association is appropriate. For example, in many jurisdictions, charitable 

hospitals are in court more often now than in the past.

Canon 4C. A judge may attend fund-raising events of law-related and other 

organizations although the judge may not be a speaker, a guest of honor, or featured 

on the program of such an event. Use of a judge’s name, position in the organization, 

and judicial designation on an organization’s letterhead, including when used for fund 

raising or soliciting members, does not violate Canon 4C if comparable information 

and designations are listed for others.

Canon 4D(1), (2), and (3). Canon 3 requires disqualification of a judge in any 

proceeding in which the judge has a financial interest, however small. Canon 4D 

requires a judge to refrain from engaging in business and from financial activities that 

might interfere with the impartial performance of the judge’s judicial duties. Canon 

4H requires a judge to report compensation received for activities outside the judicial 

office. A judge has the rights of an ordinary citizen with respect to financial affairs, 

except for limitations required to safeguard the proper performance of the judge’s 

duties. A judge’s participation in a closely held family business, while generally 

permissible, may be prohibited if it takes too much time or involves misuse of judicial 

prestige or if the business is likely to come before the court on which the judge 

serves. Owning and receiving income from investments do not as such affect the 

performance of a judge’s duties.

Canon 4D(5). The restriction on using nonpublic information is not intended to 

affect a judge’s ability to act on information as necessary to protect the health or 

safety of the judge or a member of a judge’s family, court personnel, or other judicial 

officers if consistent with other provisions of this Code.

Canon 4E. Mere residence in the judge’s household does not by itself make a 

person a member of the judge’s family for purposes of this Canon. The person must 

be treated by the judge as a member of the judge’s family.

The Applicable Date of Compliance provision of this Code addresses 

continued service as a fiduciary.

A judge’s obligation under this Code and the judge’s obligation as a fiduciary 

may come into conflict. For example, a judge should resign as a trustee if it would 

result in detriment to the trust to divest holdings whose retention would require frequent 

disqualification of the judge in violation of Canon 4D(3).

Canon 4F. The appropriateness of accepting extrajudicial assignments must 

be assessed in light of the demands on judicial resources and the need to protect the 

courts from involvement in matters that may prove to be controversial. Judges 

should not accept governmental appointments that could interfere with the 

effectiveness and independence of the judiciary, interfere with the performance of the 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 19

judge’s judicial responsibilities, or tend to undermine public confidence in the 

judiciary.

Canon 4H. A judge is not required by this Code to disclose income, debts, or 

investments, except as provided in this Canon. The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 and 

implementing regulations promulgated by the Judicial Conference impose additional 

restrictions on judges’ receipt of compensation. That Act and those regulations 

should be consulted before a judge enters into any arrangement involving the receipt 

of compensation. The restrictions so imposed include but are not limited to: (1) a 

prohibition against receiving “honoraria” (defined as anything of value received for a 

speech, appearance, or article), (2) a prohibition against receiving compensation for 

service as a director, trustee, or officer of a profit or nonprofit organization, (3) a 

requirement that compensated teaching activities receive prior approval, and (4) a 

limitation on the receipt of “outside earned income.”

CANON 5: A JUDGE SHOULD REFRAIN FROM POLITICAL ACTIVITY

A. General Prohibitions. A judge should not:

(1) act as a leader or hold any office in a political organization;

(2) make speeches for a political organization or candidate, or 

publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office; or

(3) solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution to 

a political organization or candidate, or attend or purchase a 

ticket for a dinner or other event sponsored by a political 

organization or candidate.

B. Resignation upon Candidacy. A judge should resign the judicial 

office if the judge becomes a candidate in a primary or general 

election for any office.

C. Other Political Activity. A judge should not engage in any other 

political activity. This provision does not prevent a judge from

engaging in activities described in Canon 4.

COMMENTARY

The term “political organization” refers to a political party, a group affiliated with 

a political party or candidate for public office, or an entity whose principal purpose is to 

advocate for or against political candidates or parties in connection with elections for 

public office.
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 20

Compliance with the Code of Conduct

Anyone who is an officer of the federal judicial system authorized to perform

judicial functions is a judge for the purpose of this Code. All judges should 

comply with this Code except as provided below.

A. Part-time Judge

A part-time judge is a judge who serves part-time, whether continuously 

or periodically, but is permitted by law to devote time to some other 

profession or occupation and whose compensation for that reason is 

less than that of a full-time judge. A part-time judge:

(1) is not required to comply with Canons 4A(4), 4A(5), 4D(2), 4E, 

4F, or 4H(3);

(2) except as provided in the Conflict-of-Interest Rules for Parttime Magistrate Judges, should not practice law in the court 

on which the judge serves or in any court subject to that 

court's appellate jurisdiction, or act as a lawyer in a 

proceeding in which the judge has served as a judge or in any 

related proceeding.

B. Judge Pro Tempore

A judge pro tempore is a person who is appointed to act temporarily as a 

judge or as a special master.

(1) While acting in this capacity, a judge pro tempore is not required 

to comply with Canons 4A(4), 4A(5), 4D(2), 4D(3), 4E, 4F, or 

4H(3); further, one who acts solely as a special master is not

required to comply with Canons 4A(3), 4B, 4C, 4D(4), or 5.

(2) A person who has been a judge pro tempore should not act as a 

lawyer in a proceeding in which the judge has served as a judge 

or in any related proceeding.

C. Retired Judge

A judge who is retired under 28 U.S.C. § 371(b) or § 372(a) (applicable 

to Article III judges), or who is subject to recall under § 178(d) 

(applicable to judges on the Court of Federal Claims), or who is recalled 

to judicial service, should comply with all the provisions of this Code 

except Canon 4F, but the judge should refrain from judicial service 

during the period of extrajudicial appointment not sanctioned by Canon 
Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2A, Ch. 2 Page 21

4F. All other retired judges who are eligible for recall to judicial service 

(except those in U.S. territories and possessions) should comply with 

the provisions of this Code governing part-time judges. However, 

bankruptcy judges and magistrate judges who are eligible for recall but 

who have notified the Administrative Office of the United States Courts

that they will not consent to recall are not obligated to comply with the 

provisions of this Code governing part-time judges. Such notification 

may be made at any time after retirement, and is irrevocable. A senior 

judge in the territories and possessions must comply with this Code as 

prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 373(c)(5) and (d).

COMMENTARY

The 2014 amendment to the Compliance section, regarding retired bankruptcy 

judges and magistrate judges and exempting those judges from compliance with the 

Code as part-time judges if they notify the Administrative Office of the United States 

Courts that they will not consent to recall, was not intended to alter those judges’ 

statutory entitlements to annuities, cost-of-living adjustments, or any other retirement 

benefits.

Applicable Date of Compliance

Persons to whom this Code applies should arrange their financial and fiduciary affairs 

as soon as reasonably possible to comply with it and should do so in any event within 

one year after appointment. If, however, the demands on the person's time and the 

possibility of conflicts of interest are not substantial, such a person may continue to 

act, without compensation, as an executor, administrator, trustee, or other fiduciary 

for the estate or person of one who is not a member of the person's family if 

terminating the relationship would unnecessarily jeopardize any substantial interest 

of the estate or person and if the judicial council of the circuit approves.