Can an organization of judges raise charitable funds, and may a non-judge executive director do the soliciting?

Plain-English summary

A member of an organization made up of elected judges, administrative law judges, magistrates, and referees wanted to solicit funds from the public and private sectors for charitable and educational purposes, and asked whether solicitation by a non-judge executive director, or by administrative law judge members, would be barred by MCJC 5B(2). The opinion first distinguished administrative law judges, who as lawyers are subject to the lawyer code of ethics rather than the Code of Judicial Conduct, and whose conduct is measured by MRPC 8.4(c) (and general ethical principles) rather than the MCJC directly.

The opinion explained that MCJC 5B(2) bars a judge or other judicial officer (including a referee or magistrate) from individually soliciting funds for charitable, educational, religious, fraternal, or civic organizations, or permitting the use of the prestige of office for that purpose, while allowing the judge to be listed as an officer, director, or trustee and to join a general appeal. Quoting J-1, the opinion noted that a judge may not personally solicit, including by speeches or broadcasts asking others to contribute, whether or not the judge is identified by title, but that a judge may sit on a fund-raising committee and be identified by name and office on letterhead or circulated literature so long as the judge does not individually solicit and is not the sole signator of a fund-raising letter.

The opinion concluded that if the organization's fund-raising letter is signed by someone other than one of its members, and the members do not personally participate in the solicitation, the organization's solicitation for charitable and educational purposes does not violate MCJC 5B(2). A non-judge executive director could therefore solicit on the organization's behalf.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1990, before Michigan's 2002 adoption of the Ethics 2000 revisions to its Rules of Professional Conduct, and it interprets the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct as it then stood. The opinion relies on J-1, which the committee later withdrew (replaced by J-8 in 2014), and on MCJC 5B(2) and MRPC 8.4(c), both since amended. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current Code of Judicial Conduct and Rules of Professional Conduct before relying on any specific rule or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a judge personally solicit charitable donations?

A: No. The opinion concluded a judge may not personally solicit funds for a charitable, educational, religious, fraternal, or civic organization, whether or not identified by judicial title.

Q: Can a judges' organization still raise charitable funds?

A: The opinion concluded it may, by retaining a non-judge executive director to do the soliciting, as long as the members do not personally participate in the solicitation.

Q: Can a judge's name appear on the organization's fund-raising letterhead?

A: The opinion concluded a judge may be listed as an officer, director, or trustee and be named on letterhead, provided the judge does not individually solicit and is not the sole signator of a fund-raising letter.

Q: How does this apply to administrative law judges in the organization?

A: The opinion treated administrative law judges as lawyers subject to the lawyer ethics rules, including MRPC 8.4(c), rather than directly to the MCJC.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interpreted MCJC 5B(2) of the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct and MRPC 8.4(c) (Michigan's analogue to Model Rule 8.4, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice). It relied on prior opinions J-1, CI-351, CI-633, CI-641, Judicial Tenure Commission advisory opinion JTC A/O 54, and ABA Informal Opinion 603.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 8.4 / MRPC 8.4(c) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice)

Code of Judicial Conduct (as cited):

• MCJC 5B(2) (a judge should not individually solicit funds; may join a general appeal)

Other opinions cited:

• Michigan J-1: a judge may not personally solicit funds (later withdrawn, replaced by J-8)
• Michigan CI-351, CI-633: administrative law judges subject to the lawyer code
• ABA Informal Opinion 603; JTC A/O 54

See also

• Mich Judicial Ethics Op. JI-3: door-to-door charitable solicitation by a judge

Source

• Landing page: https://www.michbar.org/opinions/ethics/numbered_opinions?OpinionID=742&Type=6

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

JI-33

December 19, 1990

SYLLABUS

A judge may not personally solicit funds on behalf of any charitable organization.

An organization of judges may retain a non-judge executive director to solicit funds for the organization's charitable and educational activities.

References: MCJC 5B(2); J-1; CI-351, CI-633; JTC A/O 54; ABA i603.

TEXT

A member of an organization of elected judges, administrative law judges, magistrates, and referees wishes to solicit funds from the public and private sectors for charitable and educational purposes. The member asks:

• Would solicitation by a non-judge executive director on the organization's behalf be prohibited by MCJC 5B(2)?

• Would solicitation on the organization's behalf by administrative law judge members be prohibited by MCJC 5B(2)?

A lawyer serving as an administrative law judge is subject to the lawyer code of ethics, and not to the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct, CI-351, CI-633. Pursuant to MRPC 8.4(c), "It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: . . . engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; . . . ." The nature of such prohibited conduct can be determined by reference to general ethical principles in relevant statutes, the MCJC, and other portions of the MRPC.

MCJC 5B(2) prohibits a judge or other judicial officer, such as referee or magistrate, from individually soliciting funds for any educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization, and from permitting the use of the prestige of the judge's office for that purpose. However, a judge may be listed as an officer, director, or trustee of the organization, and a judge may join a general appeal on behalf of an educational, religious, charitable, or fraternal organization. In J-1, the Committee stated:

"A judge may not personally solicit funds for an educational, religious, fraternal or civic/charitable organization or cause. Speeches, broadcasts, or other communications where the judge asks others to contribute would therefore be improper. This would apply whether or not the judge is identified by judicial title.

"A judge may be a member of an educational, religious, fraternal or civic/charitable, fund-raising committee as long as the judge does not individually solicit money (CI-641). MCJC 5B permits a judge to serve as director or trustee of charitable or civic organizations. It follows that the canon permits a judge to be identified by name and judicial office on a letterhead, in circulated literature or in any other communications disseminated by the organization of which the judge is a member. There is no prohibition against the organization circulating fund-raising letters on such letterhead, provided the judge is not the sole signator of the letter (CI-641).

"MCJC 5B(2) does allow a judge's participation in appeals on behalf of educational, religious, fraternal or civic/charitable organizations. Thus, if a board or committee sends a mailing to a variety of people who are known to support the organization, the presence of the judge's name on that letterhead or as one of several signators would not be improper (CI-641)."

If the organization's fund-raising letter is signed by someone other than one of its members, and the organization's members do not personally participate in the solicitation, the organization's solicitation for charitable and educational purposes does not violate MCJC 5B(2).