Iowa Administrative Code › Agency 481 - Inspections and Appeals Department › Chapter 15 - Iowa Code of Administrative Judicial Conduct › Rule 481-15.5 - Scope, Definitions, and Application.

Current through Register Vol. 47, No. 3, July 24, 2024
(1)
Scope.
a. The Iowa Code of Administrative Judicial
			 Conduct consists of four canons, each of which is codified as the introductory
			 paragraph of an administrative rule, and numbered rules under each canon, which
			 are codified as subrules. Subrule 15.5(3) establishes when the various rules
			 apply to a presiding officer or an administrative law judge.
b. The canons state overarching principles of
			 judicial ethics that all administrative law judges and presiding officers, as
			 applicable, must observe. Although an administrative law judge or presiding
			 officer may be disciplined only for violating an applicable rule, the canons
			 provide important guidance in interpreting the rules. 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 administrative law
			 judge or presiding officer in question, and no disciplinary action should be
			 taken for action or inaction within the bounds of such discretion.
c. Consistent with the requirement of Iowa
			 Code section
			 10A.801(7)(d),
			 this Code is similar in function and substantially equivalent to the Iowa Code
			 of Judicial Conduct adopted by the Iowa Supreme Court and contained in Chapter
			 51 of the Iowa Court Rules. The Iowa Code of Judicial Conduct includes
			 accompanying comments to the rules that may provide useful guidance regarding
			 the purpose, meaning, and proper application of the corresponding rule in this
			 Code. The comments contain explanatory material and, in some instances, provide
			 examples of permitted or prohibited conduct. The comments may also identify
			 aspirational goals for administrative law judges and presiding officers. To
			 implement fully the principles of this Code as articulated in the canons,
			 administrative law judges and presiding officers 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 administrative judicial
			 position.
d. The rules of this Code
			 are rules of reason that should be applied consistent with constitutional
			 requirements, statutes, administrative 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 administrative law judges and
			 presiding officers in making administrative judicial decisions.
e. Although the black letter of the rules is
			 binding and enforceable, it is not contemplated that every transgression will
			 result in the imposition of discipline. Whether discipline should be imposed
			 should be determined by the presiding officer's appointing authority through a
			 reasonable and reasoned application of the rules, and should depend upon
			 factors such as the seriousness of the transgression, the facts and
			 circumstances that existed at the time of the transgression, the extent of any
			 pattern of improper activity, whether there have been previous violations, and
			 the effect of the improper activity upon the administrative judicial system or
			 others.
f. This Code is not
			 designed or intended as a basis for civil or criminal liability. Neither is it
			 intended to be the basis for parties to seek collateral remedies against each
			 other or to obtain tactical advantages in proceedings before a presiding
			 officer.