ABA-521
|
| (Judges’ obligation to comply with their ethical duties “extend well beyond their conduct on the bench” - to “embrace the full scope of judicial administration.” Those ethical requirements and the “appearance-of-impropriety test” apply to: (1) judges’ “administrative and supervisor roles,” such as a “pipeline program“ for judicial internships, which a judge should undertake using an “objective, merit-based and inclusive“ standard, rather than favoring students from the judge’s alma mater; (2) a judge’s reaction to learning that a neighbor is being criminally investigated, about which the judge should not contact officials, which “would appear[] to use the prestige of judicial office to influence an executive or law-enforcement process;” (3) staff appointments, which must be made “made impartially and on the basis of merit,” including: appointments such as “law clerks, courtroom deputies, administrative, assistants, interns, and other staff,” which must be “merit-based” and “unrelated to merits such as school affiliation, political affiliation, social ideology, or personal loyalty;” (4) appointing a son to represent indigent defendants, which is “ethically impermissible because it creates the appearance of impropriety and favoritism”; (5) appointing lawyers from an approved list to represent indigent defendants, which must be based on “objective professional criteria“ rather than their “political views” or alignment; (6) supervisory and oversight responsibilities over those serving under the judge’s supervision, which must involve “cultivating a professional environment in which impartiality, respect, and fairness are modeled and expected at every level of court operations,” including (for example) avoidance of “gendered or racialized nicknames,” jokes or comments even made in jest that make staff members “feel demeaned and uncomfortable”). |