Title: IN RE: OKLAHOMA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
Citation: 2010 OK 90
Docket Number: SCBD-5704
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: December 13, 2010

IN RE: OKLAHOMA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT2010 OK 90Case Number: SCBD-5704Decided: 12/13/2010THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
NOTICE: THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION IN 
THE PERMANENT LAW REPORTS. UNTIL RELEASED, IT IS SUBJECT TO REVISION OR 
WITHDRAWAL. 


IN RE: OKLAHOMA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (Title 5, Ch. 1 App. 
4))
ORDER APPROVING PROPOSEDOKLAHOMA CODE OF JUDICIAL 
CONDUCT

This matter comes on before this Court upon an Application to amend the 
Oklahoma Code of Judicial Conduct at Title 5, Ch. 1 App. 4. This Court finds 
that it has jurisdiction over this matter and that an Order should enter as 
follows:
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Court that the 
Application of the Oklahoma Bar Association for approval of the proposed 
Oklahoma Code of Judicial Conduct attached hereto as Appendix A is hereby 
granted. 
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Court that the Code of 
Judicial Conduct shall be published two times in the Oklahoma Bar Journal, 
and on the Oklahoma Bar Association Web site within 60 days of the execution 
of this Order.
DONE BY ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT this 13th day of December, 2010.
/S/JAMES E. EDMONDSONCHIEF JUSTICE
EDMONDSON, C.J., TAYLOR, V.C.J, HARGRAVE, KAUGER, WATT, WINCHESTER, COLBERT, 
JJ.  Concur
REIF, J.  Not participating


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA


IN RE:
)

OKLAHOMA CODE OF JUDICIAL
)
S.C.B.D. No. 5704
CONDUCT (Title 5, Ch. 1 App. 4)
)
 

)

 
PROPOSEDOKLAHOMA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT(Title 
5, Ch. 1 App. 4)
APPENDIX A


THE PROPOSED CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT FOR OKLAHOMA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
Preamble...........................................................................................................................4
Scope................................................................................................................................5
Terminology.......................................................................................................................7
Application.......................................................................................................................11
Canon 
1...........................................................................................................................15
RULE 
1.1.........................................................................................................................15
RULE 
1.2.........................................................................................................................15
RULE 1.3 
........................................................................................................................16
 
Canon 
2...........................................................................................................................17
RULE 2.1 
........................................................................................................................17
RULE 2.2 
........................................................................................................................17
RULE 2.3 
........................................................................................................................18
RULE 2.4 
........................................................................................................................19
RULE 2.5 
........................................................................................................................19
RULE 2.6 
........................................................................................................................20
RULE 2.7 
........................................................................................................................21
RULE 2.8 
........................................................................................................................21
RULE 2.9 
........................................................................................................................22
RULE 2.10 
......................................................................................................................24
RULE 2.11 
......................................................................................................................25
RULE 2.12 
......................................................................................................................27
RULE 2.13 
......................................................................................................................28
RULE 2.14 
......................................................................................................................29
RULE 2.15 
......................................................................................................................29
RULE 2.16 
......................................................................................................................30
 
Canon 3 
..........................................................................................................................31
RULE 3.1 
........................................................................................................................31
RULE 3.2 
........................................................................................................................32
RULE 3.3 
........................................................................................................................33
RULE 3.4 
........................................................................................................................33
RULE 3.5 
........................................................................................................................33
RULE 3.6 
........................................................................................................................34
RULE 3.7 
........................................................................................................................35
RULE 3.8 
........................................................................................................................37
RULE 3.9 
........................................................................................................................37
RULE 3.10 
......................................................................................................................38
RULE 3.11 
......................................................................................................................38
RULE 3.12 
......................................................................................................................39
RULE 3.13 
......................................................................................................................39
RULE 3.14 
......................................................................................................................42
RULE 3.15 
......................................................................................................................43
 
Canon 4 
.........................................................................................................................44
RULE 4.1 
.......................................................................................................................44
RULE 4.2 
.......................................................................................................................48
RULE 4.3 
.......................................................................................................................49
RULE 4.4 
.......................................................................................................................50
RULE 4.5 
.......................................................................................................................51
RULE 4.6 
.......................................................................................................................52
 
Preamble
Proposed New Oklahoma Code
[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 Oklahoma Code of Judicial Conduct establishes standards for the 
ethical conduct of judges and judicial candidates. It is not intended as an 
exhaustive guide for the conduct of judges and judicial candidates, who are 
governed in their judicial and personal conduct by general ethical standards as 
well as by this Code. This 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 
disciplinary agencies. 


Scope
Proposed New Oklahoma Code
[1] The Oklahoma 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 this 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. Although a judge may be disciplined only for violating a 
Rule, the Canons and Comments provide important guidance in interpreting the 
Rules. Where the Rules use the term "shall" or "shall not" they establish 
mandatory standards to which judges and candidates for judicial office will be 
held. The enforcement of these standards is affected through appropriate 
disciplinary procedures. Where a Rule contains a permissive term, such as "may" 
or "should," the conduct being addressed is committed to the personal and 
professional discretion of the judge or candidate in question, and no 
disciplinary action should be taken for action or inaction within the bounds of 
such discretion. 
[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 Oklahoma 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] The Rules are binding and enforceable, however, it is not contemplated 
that every violation of a Rule will result in imposition of discipline. Whether 
discipline should be imposed should be determined through a reasonable and 
reasoned application of the Rule(s), and should depend upon factors such as 
the seriousness of the violation, the facts and circumstances that existed at 
the time of the violation, the extent of any pattern of improper activity, 
whether there have been previous violations of the Rules, 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. 



Terminology
Proposed New Oklahoma Code
In addition to the definitions found in the section on Terminology a 
candidate for judicial office should also carefully examine the Ethics 
Commission Rules found in Title 74, Chapter 62, Appendix, Title 257.
"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 for a candidate made indirectly with the 
understanding that they will be used to support the election of the 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" shall have the same meaning as that provided for all elections 
in Oklahoma by the Rules of the Oklahoma Ethics Commission as amended or revised 
See Rules 2.11, 2.13, 3.1, 3.13, 3.7, 4.1, 4.3, 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 Rules 2.11 and 3.8. 
"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, 
parent, child, or member of the judge's household 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, 2.11, 3.2, 3.8, and 3.13.
"Fiduciary" includes, but is not limited to, relationships such 
as executor, administrator, trustee, or guardian. See Rules 2.11, 3.2, and 3.8. 

"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, 2.6, 2.8, 2.10, 2.11, 2.13, 
3.1, 3.6, 3.7, 3.13, 4.1, and 4.2. 
"Impending matter" is a matter that is imminent or reasonably likely to occur 
in the near future. See Rules 2.9 and 3.2.
"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 Rules 1.2, 3.6, and 3.13. 
"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, 2.7, 2.10, 3.1, 
3.2, 3.4, 3.7, 3.12, 3.13, 3.14, 4.1, and 4.2. 
"Integrity" means probity, fairness, honesty, uprightness, and soundness of 
character. See Canon 1 and 4, and Rules 1.2, 2.7, 2.10, 2.16, 3.1, 3.2, 3.6, 
3.7, 3.12, 3.13, 3.14, 4.1, and 4.2. 
"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. A Judicial candidate should 
also examine the definition of a candidate in the Rules of the Ethics 
Commission, Title 74 Oklahoma Statutes Chapter 62 - Appendix-Title 257: 
when filing for a judicial 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 1.3, 2.9, 2.11, 2.15, 2.16, 3.2, 3.4, and 4.1. 
"Law" encompasses court rules as well as statutes, constitutional provisions, 
and decisional law. See Rules 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.11, 
2.13, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.7, 3.9, 3.10, 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, 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, child, grandchild, parent, 
grandparent, or other relative or person with whom the judge maintains a close 
familial relationship. See Rules 3.8, and 3.10. 
"Member of the judge's household" means any person residing in the judge's 
home on a permanent basis regardless of the relationship of that person to the 
judge. See Rules 2.11, 2.13, 3.8, and 3.13. 
"Member of the lawyer's household" means any person residing in the lawyer's 
home on a permanent basis regardless of the relationship of that person to the 
lawyer. See Rule 2.13(B) 
"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. 
"Pending matter" is a matter that has commenced. A matter continues to be 
pending through any appellate process until final disposition or if a court 
retains jurisdiction of the matter. See Rules 2.9 and 3.2. 
"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 Rules 4.1 and 4.3. 
"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, 
4.2, and 4.3. 
"Public election" includes primary and general elections, nonpartisan 
elections, and retention elections. See Rules 4.2 and 4.4. 
"Rules of the Ethics Commission" means the Rules of the Oklahoma Ethics 
Commission found in Title 74 Oklahoma Statutes Chapter 62 - Appendix - Title 
257, Ethics Commission as they are, and as they may be amended or revised. See 
Rule 3.12. 
"Specialized Courts" means the various types of what are often referred to as 
"problem solving courts" such as drug courts, mental health courts and juvenile 
courts. See Application I Comment [3], Rule 2.9(A)(4) and Rule 2.9 Comment 4. 

"Spouse" means an individual to whom a judge or judicial candidate is 
married. See Rules 2.11, 2.13, 3.13, and 3.14. 
"Third degree of relationship" includes the following persons: 
great-grandparent, grandparent, parent, uncle, aunt, brother, sister, child, 
grandchild, great-grandchild, nephew, and niece. See Rules 2.11 and 2.13. 



Application
Proposed New Oklahoma Code
The Application section establishes when the various rules apply to a judge 
or judicial candidate.
I. Applicability of this Code 
(A) The provisions of the Code apply to all full-time judges. Parts II 
through V of this section identify provisions that apply to the four categories 
of part-time judges only while they are serving as judges, and provisions that 
do not apply to part-time judges at any time. Rules that do not appear in 
Section II through V are therefore applicable to part-time judges at all times. 
Canon 4 applies to judicial candidates.
 
 (B) 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, special master, referee, or member of the administrative law 
judiciary.
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] The determination of which category and, accordingly, which specific 
Rules apply to an individual judicial officer, depends upon the facts of the 
particular judicial service. 
[3] In recent years specialized courts have been created in which judges are 
authorized by court rules to act in nontraditional ways. For example, judges 
presiding in drug courts and mental health courts who are monitoring the 
progress of participants in those courts' programs may be authorized and even 
encouraged to communicate directly with social workers, probation officers, and 
others outside the context of their usual judicial role as independent decision 
makers on issues of fact and law. When local rules specifically authorize 
conduct not otherwise permitted under these Rules, they take precedence over the 
provisions set forth in the Code. Nevertheless, judges serving on these 
specialized courts shall comply with this Code except to the extent local rules 
provide and permit otherwise.
[4] The inclusion of the last phrase in the Application section is to make it 
clear that the Code not only applies to judges, but it also applies to 
those who are candidates for judicial office. Candidates, whether sitting judges 
or not, are subject to discipline under this Code.


II. RETIRED JUDGE ON ACTIVE STATUS
A retired judge on active status, who by law is not permitted to practice 
law, is not required to comply:
(A) with Rule 3.9 (Service as Arbitrator or Mediator), except while serving 
as a judge; or (B) at any time with Rule 3.8(A) (Appointments to Fiduciary 
Positions). 
COMMENT 
 
[1] For the purposes of this section, as long as a retired judge is on active 
status the judge is considered to "perform judicial functions."
III. CONTINUING PART-TIME JUDGE 
A judge who serves repeatedly on a part-time basis by election or under a 
continuing appointment,
(A) is not required to comply: 
(1) 4.1 (Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial Candidates 
in General (A)(1) through (7), except while serving as a judge; or 
 
(2) at any time with Rules 3.4 (Appointments to Governmental Positions), 
3.8(A) (Appointments to Fiduciary Positions), 3.9 (Service as Arbitrator or 
Mediator), 3.10 (Practice of Law), 3.11(B) (Financial, Business, or Remunerative 
Activities), 3.14 (Reimbursement of Expenses and Waivers of Fees or Charges), 
and 3.15 (Reporting Requirements), and.
(B) shall not practice law in the court on which the judge serves or in any 
court subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the court on which the judge 
serves, and 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. 
COMMENT 
[1] When a person who has been a continuing part-time judge is no longer a 
continuing part-time judge, including a retired judge not on active service, 
that person may act as a lawyer in a proceeding in which he or she has served as 
a judge or in any other proceeding related thereto only with the informed 
consent of all parties, and pursuant to any applicable Oklahoma Rules of 
Professional Conduct including Rule 1.12.


IV. PERIODIC PART-TIME JUDGE 
A periodic part-time judge who serves or expects to serve repeatedly on a 
part-time basis, but under a separate appointment for each limited period of 
service or for each matter, 
(A) is not required to comply: 
(1) with Rule 4.1 (Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial 
Candidates in General) (A)(1) through (7), except while serving as a judge; or 

(2) at any time with Rules 3.4 (Appointments to Governmental Positions), 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), 3.13 (Acceptance and Reporting of Gifts, 
Loans, Bequests, Benefits, or Other Things of Value), 3.15 (Reporting 
Requirements), and 4.5 (Activities of Judges Who Become Candidates for 
Nonjudicial Office); and 
(B) shall not practice law in the court on which the judge serves or in any 
court subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the court on which the judge 
serves, and 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. 


V. PRO TEMPORE PART-TIME JUDGE 
A pro tempore part-time judge who serves or expects to serve once or only 
sporadically on a part-time basis under a separate appointment for each period 
of service or for each case heard is not required to comply: 
(A) except while serving as a judge, with Rules 2.4 (External Influences on 
Judicial Conduct), or 3.2 (Appearances before Governmental Bodies and 
Consultation with Government Officials) 4.1 (Political and Campaign Activities 
of Judge and Judicial Candidates in General (A)(1) through (7); or 
(B) at any time with Rules 3.4 (Appointments to Governmental Positions), 3.6 
(Affiliation with Discriminatory Organizations), 3.7 (Participation in 
Educational, Religious, Charitable, Fraternal, or Civic Organizations and 
Activities), 3.8(A) (Appointments to Fiduciary Positions), 3.9 (Service as 
Arbitrator or Mediator), 3.10 (Practice of Law), 3.11(B) (Financial, Business, 
or Remunerative Activities), 3.13 (Acceptance and Reporting of Gifts, Loans, 
Bequests, Benefits, or Other Things of Value), 3.15 (Reporting Requirements), 
and 4.5 (Activities of Judges Who Become Candidates for Nonjudicial 
Office).


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


Canon 1
Proposed New Oklahoma Code
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. 



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 avoid 
impropriety and the appearance of impropriety. 
Comment: 
[1] Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by improper conduct and 
conduct that creates the appearance of impropriety. 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 or appears to compromise the independence, 
integrity, and impartiality of a judge undermines public confidence in the 
judiciary. Because it is not practicable to list all such conduct, the Rule is 
necessarily cast in general terms. 
[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 other 
specific 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 is permitted and encouraged to 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
Comment:
[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. 
[5] A judge should not testify unless duly summoned as a character witness. 
See also Rule 3.3 


Canon 2
Proposed New Oklahoma Code
Canon 2 
A Judge Shall 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
[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, including but not 
limited to bias, prejudice, or harassment based upon race, sex, gender, 
religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, 
marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, 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, based upon 
attributes including but not limited to race, sex, gender, religion, national 
origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, 
socioeconomic status, or political affiliation, against parties, witnesses, 
lawyers, or others. 
(D) The restrictions of paragraphs (B) and (C) do not preclude judges or 
lawyers from making legitimate reference to the listed factors, or similar 
factors, when they 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 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. 
[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. 


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 permit others to convey the impression that 
any person or organization is in a position to influence the judge.
COMMENT 
[1] An independent judiciary requires that judges 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. Confidence in the judiciary is eroded if judicial 
decision making is perceived to be subject to inappropriate outside influences. 



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] 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] 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) A judge may encourage parties to a proceeding and their lawyers to settle 
matters in dispute but shall 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 the 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 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 is required by Rule 2.11 or other law. Administrative 
reassignment for the purpose of judicial efficiency is not prohibited.
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 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 the verdict of the jury other than 
in a court order or opinion in a proceeding. However, after the conclusion of a 
trial a judge is encouraged to express appreciation to the jurors for their 
service to the judicial system and to the community. 
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. 
[
[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, except as 
follows: 
(
(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 gives advance 
notice to the parties of the person to be consulted and the subject matter of 
the advice to be solicited, and affords the parties a reasonable opportunity to 
object and respond to the notice and 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) With the consent of all parties, the judge and court personnel may have 
ex parte communication with those involved in a specialized court team. Any 
party may expressly waive the right to receive that information.
(5) 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. 
(6) 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 independently, and shall 
consider only the evidence presented and any facts that may properly be 
judicially noticed. While a judge shall not independently investigate facts in a 
case, and shall consider only the evidence presented, a judge may seek 
information of a general nature that does not bear on a disputed evidentiary 
fact or influence the judge's opinion of the substantive merits a specific case. 

(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 the 
Rule. 
[4] A judge may initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications 
expressly authorized by law, such as when serving on specialized 
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 with other judges on pending matters, but must avoid 
ex parte discussions of a case with judges who have previously been disqualified 
from hearing the matter, and with judges who have appellate jurisdiction over 
the matter. 
[6] The prohibition in the rule against a judge investigating the facts in a 
case independently or through a member of the judge's staff extends to 
information in all mediums, including electronic ones. 
[7] The prohibition does not apply to a judge's effort to obtain general 
information about a specialized area of knowledge that does not include the 
application of such information in a specific case. 
[8] The prohibition in this rule does not apply to interstate or 
state-federal communications among judges on the general topic of case 
management decisions in mass torts or other complex cases, such as discovery 
schedules, standard interrogatories, shared discovery depositories, appointment 
of liaison counsel, committee membership, or common fund structures. If 
communications of this nature have occurred the judge should disclose these 
communications to the parties. 
[9] A judge may consult ethics advisory committees, outside counsel, or legal 
experts concerning the judge's compliance with this Code. Such consultations are 
not subject to the restrictions of paragraph (A)(2). 


RULE 2.10 
Judicial Statements on Pending and Impending Cases
(A) A judge shall not make any public statement that might 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 might 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] 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. 
[3] This Rule does not prohibit a judge from commenting on proceedings in 
which the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity or represents a client as 
permitted by these rules. 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. 


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, a member of the 
judge's household, or a person within the third degree of relationship to any of 
them, or the spouse 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, parent, or child, or any member of the judge's household, has an 
economic interest in the subject matter in controversy or is a party to the 
proceeding. 
(4) The judge knows or learns by means of a timely motion that a party, a 
party's lawyer, or the law firm of a party's lawyer has within the previous four 
(4) years made aggregate contributions to the judge's campaign in an amount that 
a reasonable person would believe could affect the fairness of the judge's 
consideration of a case involving the party, the party's lawyer or the law firm 
of the party's lawyer. The judge should consider what the public perception 
would be as to such contributions affecting the judge's ability to be fair to 
the parties. Contributions within the limits allowed by the Oklahoma Ethics 
Commission will not normally require disqualification unless other factors are 
present. 
(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 or appears to commit the judge to reach a particular result or rule in a 
particular 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 substantially as a lawyer in the matter during such 
association; 
(b) served in governmental employment, and in such capacity participated 
personally and substantially as a lawyer or 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 or in any 
adjudicatory capacity. 
(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 and members of the judge's 
household. 
(C) A judge subject to disqualification under this Rule, other than for bias 
or prejudice under paragraph (A)(1), may disclose on the record the basis of the 
judge's disqualification and may ask the parties and their lawyers to consider, 
outside the presence of the judge and court personnel, whether to waive 
disqualification. If, following the disclosure, the parties and lawyers agree, 
without participation by the judge or court personnel, that the judge should not 
be disqualified, the judge may participate in the proceeding. The agreement 
shall be incorporated into the record of the proceeding. 
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 (6) apply.
[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 to 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: 
(a) an interest in the individual holdings within a mutual or common 
investment fund; 
(b) an interest in securities held by an educational, religious, charitable, 
fraternal, or civic organization in which the judge or the judge's spouse, 
parent, child or member of the judge's household serves as a director, officer, 
advisor, or other participant; 
(c) 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 
(d) an interest in the issuer of government securities held by the judge. 



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 in a 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, favoritism, and unnecessary appointments. 
(B) A judge shall not appoint a lawyer to a position if the judge either 
knows that the lawyer, the lawyer's spouse or a member of the lawyer's household 
has contributed to the judge's election campaign an amount which a reasonable 
person would believe could affect the appointment or learns of such a 
contribution by means of a timely motion by a party or other person properly 
interested in the matter, 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 (A). 
[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, member of the judge's household or the spouse of such relative 
or member of the judge's household. 
[3] The rule against making administrative appointments of lawyers who have 
contributed in excess of a reasonable dollar amount to a judge's election 
campaign includes an exception for positions that are substantially 
uncompensated, such as those for which the lawyer's compensation is limited to 
reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses. 


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] "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 shall inform the 
appropriate authority.
(B) A judge having knowledge that a lawyer has committed a violation of the 
Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question 
regarding the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other 
respects shall inform the appropriate authority. 
(C) A judge who receives information indicating a substantial likelihood that 
another judge has committed a violation of this Code shall take appropriate 
action. 
(D) A judge who receives information indicating a substantial likelihood that 
a lawyer has committed a violation of the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct 
shall take appropriate action. 
COMMENT 
[1] Taking action to address known misconduct is a judge's obligation. 
Paragraphs (A) and (B) impose an obligation on the judge to report to the 
appropriate disciplinary authority the known misconduct of another judge or a 
lawyer that raises a substantial question regarding the honesty, 
trustworthiness, or fitness of that judge or lawyer. Ignoring or denying known 
misconduct among one's judicial colleagues or members of the legal profession 
undermines a judge's responsibility to participate in efforts to ensure public 
respect for the justice system. This Rule limits the reporting obligation to 
those offenses that an independent judiciary must vigorously endeavor to 
prevent. 
[2] A judge who does not have actual knowledge that another judge or a lawyer 
may have committed misconduct, but receives information indicating a substantial 
likelihood of such misconduct, is required to take appropriate action under 
paragraphs (C) and (D). Appropriate action may include, but is not limited to, 
communicating directly with the judge who may have violated this Code, 
communicating with a supervising judge, or reporting the suspected violation to 
the appropriate authority or other agency or body. Similarly, actions to be 
taken in response to information indicating that a lawyer has committed a 
violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct may include but are not limited 
to communicating directly with the lawyer who may have committed the violation, 
or reporting the suspected violation to the appropriate authority or other 
agency or body. 


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 
discipline agencies, as required in paragraph (A), instills confidence in 
judges' commitment to the integrity of the judicial system and the protection of 
the public. 


Canon 3
Proposed New Oklahoma Code
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;
(C) participate in activities that would appear to a reasonable person to 
undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality;
(D) engage in conduct that would appear to a reasonable person to be 
coercive; or
(E) make use of court premises, staff, stationery, equipment, or other 
resources, except for incidental use for activities that concern the law, the 
legal system, or the administration of justice, or unless such additional use is 
permitted by law. This Rule is also subject to the exceptions provided for in 
Rule 4.1A(10) and 4.1C.
COMMENT 
[1] To the extent that time permits, and judicial independence and 
impartiality are not compromised, judges are encouraged to engage in appropriate 
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] 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. 
[3] 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. See Rule 3.6. 
[4] A judge's extrajudicial activities must not be conducted in connection or 
affiliation with an organization that practices invidious discrimination. 
[5] 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. 



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 pro se in a matter involving the judge's legal 
or economic interests or when the judge is acting in a fiduciary 
capacity.
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 governmental 
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. 
[3] In general, it would be an unnecessary and unfair burden to prohibit 
judges from appearing before governmental bodies or consulting with government 
officials on matters that are likely to affect them as private citizens, such as 
zoning proposals affecting their real property. In engaging in such activities, 
however, judges must not refer to their judicial positions, and must otherwise 
exercise caution to avoid using the prestige of judicial office. 



RULE 3.3 
Testifying as a Character Witness
A judge shall not testify 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.


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, or the judge has the 
specific approval of the Supreme Court.
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.
[2] A judge may represent his or her country, state, or locality on 
ceremonial occasions or in connection with historical, educational, or cultural 
activities. Such representation does not constitute acceptance of a government 
position. 


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] In the course of performing judicial duties, a judge may acquire 
information of commercial or other value that is unavailable to the public. The 
judge must not reveal or use such information for personal gain or for any 
purpose unrelated to his or her judicial duties.
[2] 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. 


RULE 3.6 
Affiliation with Discriminatory Organizations
(A) A judge shall not hold membership in any organization that practices 
invidious discrimination.
(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. 
(C)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. The answer cannot be determined 
from a mere examination of an organization's current membership rolls, but 
rather, depends upon how the organization selects members, as well as other 
relevant factors, such as whether the organization is dedicated to the 
preservation of religious, ethnic, or cultural values of legitimate common 
interest to its members, or whether it is an intimate, purely private 
organization whose membership limitations could not constitutionally be 
prohibited. 
[3] When 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. 
[5] This Rule does not apply to national or state military service. 



RULE 3.7 
Participation in Educational, Religious, Charitable, Fraternal, or Civic 
Organizations and Activities
(A) 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:
(1) assisting such an organization or entity in planning related to 
fund-raising, and participating in the management and investment of the 
organization's or entity's funds; 
(2) soliciting contributions for such an organization or entity, but only 
from members of the judge's family, members of the judge's household or from 
judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority; 

(3) soliciting membership for such an organization or entity, even though the 
membership dues or fees generated may be used to support the objectives of the 
organization or entity, but only if the organization or entity is concerned with 
the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice; 
(4) 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 fund-raising purpose, the judge may participate only if the event 
concerns the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice; 
(5) making recommendations to such a public or private fund-granting 
organization or entity in connection with its programs and activities, but only 
if the organization or entity is concerned with the law, the legal system, or 
the administration of justice; and 
(6) serving as an officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of such an 
organization or entity, unless it is likely that the organization or entity: 

(a) will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the 
judge; or
(b) 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.
(B) A judge may encourage lawyers to provide pro bono legal services. 
(C) Subject to the requirements of Rule 3.1 and Rule 3.7(A) and (B), a judge 
may: 
(1) Provide leadership in:
(a) Identifying and addressing issues involving providing equal access to the 
justice system;
(b) Developing public education programs;
(c) Engaging in community outreach activities to promote the fair 
administration of justice; and 
(d) Convening, participating or assisting in advisory committees and 
community collaborations devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal 
system, the provision of services and/or the administration of justice.
(2) A judge may endorse projects and programs directly related to the law, 
the legal system, the provision of services and/or the administration of 
justice.
(3) A judge may participate in programs concerning the law or which promote 
the administration of justice. 
COMMENT 
[1] The activities permitted by paragraph (A) 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 
fund-raising purpose, does not constitute a violation of paragraph 4(A). 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 fund-raising 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 
fund-raising 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. 


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, or member of the judge's household 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 position 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 apart from the judge's official duties unless expressly 
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 expressly authorized by 
law.


RULE 3.10 
Practice of Law
A judge shall not practice law. A judge may act pro se 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 forum.
COMMENT 
[1] 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. A judge must not use the prestige of office to advance the 
judge's personal or family interests. See Rule 1.3.
[2] This Rule does not prohibit the practice of law pursuant to military 
service. 


RULE 3.11 
Financial, Business, or Remunerative Activities
(A) A judge may hold and manage investments of the judge, members of 
the judge's family and members of the judge's household. 
(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, members of the judge's family or 
members of the judge's household; or
(2) a business entity primarily engaged in investment of the financial 
resources of the judge, members of the judge's family or members of the 
judge's household.
(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.
COMMENT 
[1] Judges are generally permitted to engage in financial activities, 
including managing real estate and other investments for themselves, for members 
of their families or members of the judge's household. Participation in these 
activities, like participation in other extrajudicial activities, is subject to 
the requirements 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] 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. 



RULE 3.12 
Compensation for Extrajudicial Activities
The compensation for extrajudicial activities of a judge is controlled and 
regulated by the Rules of the Ethics Commission or other applicable law. If a 
judge is permitted to accept extrajudicial compensation under those rules the 
judge should refrain from accepting such compensation if it would appear to a 
reasonable person to undermine the judge's independence, integrity or 
impartiality. (See Rules of Ethics Commission 20-1-9(h). 
COMMENT 
[1] A judge may only accept compensation as provided by the Rules of the 
Ethics Commission or other applicable law. Any compensation that is permitted 
must be reasonable and commensurate with the task performed. A judge should be 
mindful, however, that judicial duties must take precedence over other 
activities. See Rule 2.1.
[2] Compensation derived from extrajudicial activities is subject to public 
reporting under the Rules of the Ethics Commission. 


RULE 3.13 
Accepting 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 the Rules of the Ethics 
Commission or other law or would appear to a reasonable person to undermine the 
judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality.
(B) Unless otherwise prohibited by the Rules of the Ethics Commission or 
other law, 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 close 
personal friends, relatives; or members of the judge's household and their 
relatives. 
(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) scholarships, fellowships, and similar benefits or awards specifically 
for judicial education; 
(8) books, magazines, journals, audiovisual materials, and other resource 
materials supplied by publishers on a complimentary basis for official use; or 

(9) gifts incident to a public testimonial; 
(10) invitations to the judge and the judge's spouse, member of the judges' 
household, or guest to attend without charge:
(a) an event associated with 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; and
(11) gifts, awards, or benefits associated with the business, profession, or 
other separate activity of a spouse, or member of the judge's household, but 
that incidentally benefit the judge. However, such benefits provided to a spouse 
or member of the judge's household are also subject to the same limitation as a 
judge. 
(C) Under the Rules of the Ethics Commission there are specific limitations 
on a state officer or employee asking for, soliciting, receiving or agreeing to 
receive things of value from; 
(1) a lobbyist or lobbyist principal;
(2) a person who is seeking to do business or doing business with the 
government entity of which the state officer's or state employee's office or 
employment to a part; and
(3) a person who has an economic interest in actions or matters before or 
affecting the governmental entity of which the state officer's or state 
employee's office or employment is a part.
A judge should carefully examine the Rules of the Ethics Commission to 
determine the limitations imposed by these Rules on receiving things of value 
from anyone in one of these three categories.
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, according to the magnitude of the risk. 
Paragraph (B) identifies circumstances in which the risk that the acceptance 
would appear to undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality 
is low. As the value of the benefit or the likelihood that the source of the 
benefit will appear before the judge increases, the judge may be prohibited 
under paragraph (A), or (C) from accepting the gift.
[2] Gift-giving between personal 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.
[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, 
or member of 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. 
[6] As described in Paragraph (C) of this rule, a person with an economic 
interest in matters before or affecting the governmental entity served by the 
recipient would include a party or other person, including a lawyer, who has 
come or is likely to come before the judge, or whose interests have come or are 
likely to come before the judge. 


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 (C) 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 and, when appropriate to the occasion, by the judge's spouse, member 
of the judges' household, or guest. 
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 the Rules of the 
Ethics Commission. 
[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 sources 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.
(i) whether the sponsor or the source of funding is a member of one of the 
three restricted categories of givers described in paragraph (B) and in the 
Rules of the Ethics Commission.


RULE 3.15 
Reporting Requirements
A judge shall publicly report the amount or value of compensation or other 
things of value as required by the Rules of the Ethics Commission or pursuant to 
applicable law;
Canon 4
Proposed New Oklahoma Code
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, 4.3, and 4.4, 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 another candidate 
for public office.
(3) publicly endorse or oppose another candidate for any public office;
(4) solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution to a 
political organization or another candidate for public office;
(5) attend or purchase tickets for dinners or other events sponsored by a 
political organization or another candidate for public office provided that the 
exception granted to a candidate for judicial office pursuant to Title 20 O.S. § 
1404.1(1) shall also be granted to a judge who is a candidate for judicial 
election.
(6) publicly identify himself or herself as a candidate of a political 
organization;
(7) seek, accept, or use endorsements from a political organization;
(8) personally solicit or accept campaign contributions other than through a 
campaign committee authorized by Rule 4.4;
(9) use or permit the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit 
of the judge, the candidate, or others;
(10) require or compel court staff to aid or assist in a campaign for 
judicial office or use court resources in such a campaign;
(11) knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the truth, make any false or 
misleading statement
(12) 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 

(13) 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. 
(14) knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth misrepresent the 
identity, qualifications, present position or other fact concerning the 
candidate or an opponent.
(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). 
(C) For campaign purposes photographs may be taken in a courtroom by a judge 
or judicial candidate, but not while the court is in session. 
COMMENT 
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
[1] The State of Oklahoma has a compelling interest in maintaining the 
independence, integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, thus enhancing public 
confidences in the judicial system. 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 and the constitutional provisions governing free speech and 
expressive association. 
[2] When a person becomes a judicial candidate, this Canon becomes applicable 
to his or her conduct. A successful candidate for judicial office is subject to 
discipline under the Code for violation of any of the Rules set forth in Canon 
4, even if the candidate was not a judge during the period of candidacy. An 
unsuccessful candidate who is a lawyer is subject to discipline under the 
Oklahoma Rules of Professional 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. Although judges and judicial candidates may register to 
vote as members of a political party, 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 a candidate for another public office 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 
opposing candidates for the same judicial office for which they are running. See 
Rules 4.2(B)(2) and 4.2(B)(3). 
[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 candidate publicly endorsing 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 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. 
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. Paragraphs 
(A)(11) and A(14) obligate 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)(11), (A)(12), (A)(13), or A(14) 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)(12), a judicial candidate 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)(12) 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)(13) 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)(13) does not specifically address judicial 
responses to such inquiries, but candidates should proceed with caution if they 
choose to respond to such questionnaire or requests. 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)(13), 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 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


RULE 4.2
Political and Campaign Activities of Judicial Candidates in Public 
Elections
(A) A judicial candidate in a 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 the State of Oklahoma; 
(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, unless prohibited by law, 
and not earlier than 180 days before the beginning of the filing period for the 
judicial office:
(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 other 
than a partisan political organization; and 
COMMENT 
[1] Paragraph (B) permits judicial candidates in public elections to engage 
in some political and campaign activities otherwise prohibited by Rule 4.1. 
Candidates may not engage in these activities earlier than 180 days before the 
beginning of the filing period for the judicial office.
[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), (11), (13) and (14). 
[3] In nonpartisan public elections or retention elections, paragraph (B)(4) 
prohibits a candidate from seeking, accepting, or using nominations or 
endorsements from a partisan political organization. 
[4] Justices or judges who are subject to a retention election are sometimes 
publicly supported or opposed by individuals or organizations, including 
political organizations. If such a justice or judge is opposed by individuals or 
organizations the justice or judge has all of the rights and responsibilities as 
any other candidate for judicial office. However, justices or judges who are 
standing for retention and who have not drawn active opposition, are not 
permitted to seek endorsements from any individual or organization, or to use 
such endorsements to further their campaign. 


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 
other than a partisan political organization. 
COMMENT 
[1] When seeking support or endorsement, or when communicating directly with 
an appointing or confirming authority, a candidate for appointive 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)(13).
[2] Candidates for appointive judicial office have no need to raise or spend 
campaign funds. Accordingly, they are not only prohibited from personally 
soliciting or personally accepting campaign contributions, but are also 
prohibited from establishing campaign committees for this purpose. 



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 permitted 
by law. Rule 2.11(4).
(2) not to solicit or accept contributions for a candidate's current campaign 
more than 180 days before the beginning of the filing period for the judicial 
election. nor more than 60 days after the last election in which the candidate 
participated; and 
(3) Candidates for judicial office subject to public elections shall direct 
their campaign committees to comply with all applicable statutory requirements 
for disclosure of campaign contributions, and to file with the Oklahoma Ethics 
Commission at the time and in the manner specified by the Commission a report 
stating the name, address, occupation, and employer of each person who has made 
campaign contributions to the committee in an aggregate value exceeding the 
amount established by the Oklahoma Ethics Commission for reporting campaign 
contributions. 
(4) Candidates for judicial office subject to public election shall comply 
with the rules of the Oklahoma Ethics Commission concerning the dissolution of 
the candidate's campaign committee and the use of surplus funds of the campaign 
as set out in Title 74 Oklahoma Statutes Chapter 62, Appendix to Article 257, 
Sections 10-1-19 and 10-1-20, except that a candidate may not transfer funds to 
be used for a political activity other than his or her own future election 
campaign as permitted by the Rules of the Ethics Commission and may not transfer 
any surplus funds to a state or local central committee of a political party. 

COMMENT 
[1] Judicial candidates are prohibited from personally soliciting campaign 
contributions or personally accepting campaign contributions. See Rule 
4.1(A)(8). This Rule recognizes that in many jurisdictions, 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. See Comment 2 under Rule 4.3. 
[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 Rules of the Ethics 
Commission, election law and other applicable law, and for the activities of 
their campaign committees. 
[3] At the start of a campaign, the candidate must instruct the campaign 
committee to solicit or accept only such contributions as are in conformity with 
the Rules of the Ethics Commission and other applicable law. 


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. 



RULE 4.6 
STATEMENT OF CANDIDATE FOR JUDICIAL OFFICE
(A) In all judicial elections within ten (10) days after formally announcing 
and/or qualifying for election or reelection (whichever is earlier) to any 
judicial office in the State of Oklahoma, all candidates, including incumbent 
judges, shall forward written notice of such candidacy, together with the 
candidate's correct mailing address, current telephone number, e-mail address, 
facsimile (telefax) number and actual physical address to the Administrative 
Director of the Courts.
(B) Upon receipt of the notice, the Administrative Director shall by 
Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, cause to be distributed to each 
candidate who has filed a notice copies of the following:
(1) The Code of Judicial Conduct
(2) Summaries of all previous Formal Advisory Opinions, if any, issued by the 
Judicial Ethics Panel which relate in any way to campaign conduct and 
practices.
(3) The Acknowledgment Form
(C) The Acknowledgment Form shall be executed and returned by the candidate 
to the Administrative Director of the Courts within ten (10) days of its 
delivery to the candidate as shown by 
the Certified Mail Receipt.
(D) The Acknowledgment Form shall certify that the candidate has received, 
has read, and understands the requirements of the Oklahoma Code of Judicial 
Conduct and agrees to comply with and be bound by the Code during the course of 
his/her campaign for the judicial office. The Acknowledgment Form shall be in 
substantially the following form: 
STATEMENT OF CANDIDATE FOR JUDICIAL OFFICE
I, __________, a candidate for judicial office in the State of Oklahoma, have 
received, have read, understand and agree to comply with the Oklahoma Code of 
Judicial Conduct during the 
course of my campaign for judicial office. I specifically understand that if 
I were to violate the terms of the Code I would be subject to dicipline under 
the Code or under the Rules of Professional Conduct for lawyers.
____________Date 
____________________Signature of Candidate 
 
(E) The failure 
of a candidate to file the notice as required in Rule 4.6(A) or to file the 
Acknowledgment Form as required in Rule 4.6(C) shall constitute a Per Se 
Violation of Canon 4 of the Oklahoma Code of Judicial Conduct and will be a 
basis for discipline under the Code. 
(F) Upon request, the documents executed by a candidate for judicial election 
in accordance with this Rule shall be made available to the Oklahoma Supreme 
Court, The General Counsel of the Oklahoma Bar Association, The Professional 
Responsibility Panel on Judicial Elections and the Council on Judicial 
Complaints.