AFFILIATION WITH DISCRIMINATORY ORGANIZATIONS

(A) A judge shall not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. A judge’s membership in a religious organization as a lawful exercise of the freedom of religion is not prohibited. (B) A judge shall not use the benefits or facilities of an organization if the judge knows* or should know that the organization practices invidious discrimination on one or more of the bases identified in paragraph (A). A judge’s attendance at an event in a facility of an organization that the judge is not permitted to join is not a violation of this rule when the judge’s attendance is an isolated event that could not reasonably be perceived as an endorsement of the organization’s practices. Comment [1] A judge’s public manifestation of approval of invidious discrimination on any basis gives rise to the appearance of impropriety and diminishes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. A judge’s membership in an organization that practices invidious discrimination creates the perception that the judge’s impartiality is impaired. Ch 51, p.18 IOWA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT August 2010 [2] An organization is generally said to discriminate invidiously if it arbitrarily excludes from membership on the basis of race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or sexual orientation persons who would otherwise be eligible for admission. 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] This rule does not apply to national or state military service. [Court Order April 30, 2010, effective May 3, 2010] 51:3.7: PARTICIPATION IN EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, CHARITABLE, Rule FRATERNAL, OR CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS AND ACTIVITIES (A) Subject to the requirements of rule 51:3.1, a judge may participate in activities sponsored by organizations or governmental entities concerned with the law, the legal system, the provision of legal services, 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, volunteering goods or services at fundraising events, 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,* or from judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority; (3) 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, the provision of legal services, or the administration of justice; (4) 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, the provision of legal services, or the administration of justice; and (5) 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 publico legal services. (C) Subject to the requirements of rule 51:3.1, a judge may: (1) provide leadership in identifying and addressing issues involving equal access to the justice system; developing public education programs; engaging in activities to promote the fair administration of justice and convening, participating or assisting in advisory committees and community collaborations devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system, the provision of legal services, or the administration of justice. (2) endorse projects and programs directly related to the law, the legal system, the provision of legal services, and the administration of justice to those coming before the courts. (3) participate in programs concerning the law or which promote the administration of justice. August 2010 IOWA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT Ch 51, p.19 Comment [1] The activities permitted by paragraph (A) generally include those sponsored by or undertaken institutions, and other not-for-profit on behalf of public or private not-for-profit educational 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] Attendance at fundraising events and volunteering services or goods at or in support of fundraising events do not present an element of coercion or abuse the prestige of the judicial office and are not prohibited by this rule. [4] 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 publico 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 publico legal work, and participating in events recognizing lawyers who have done pro bono publico work. [5] Judges, as parents, may assist their children in their fundraising activities if the procedures employed are not coercive and the sums nominal. [Court Order April 30, 2010, effective May 3, 2010]