25.02.2013 Views

View - State of Iowa

View - State of Iowa

View - State of Iowa

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

August 2010 IOWA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT Ch 51, p.17<br />

judicial <strong>of</strong>fice to advance the interests <strong>of</strong> another. See rule 51:1.3. Except in unusual circumstances<br />

where the demands <strong>of</strong> justice require, a judge should discourage a party from requiring the judge<br />

to testify as a character witness.<br />

[Court Order April 30, 2010, effective May 3, 2010]<br />

Rule 51:3.4: APPOINTMENTS TO GOVERNMENTAL POSITIONS<br />

A judge shall not accept appointment to a governmental committee, board, commission,<br />

or other governmental position, unless it is one that concerns the law, the legal system, the<br />

provision <strong>of</strong> legal services, or the administration <strong>of</strong> justice.<br />

Comment<br />

[1] Rule 3.4 implicitly acknowledges the value <strong>of</strong> judges accepting appointments to entities<br />

that concern the law, the legal system, the provision <strong>of</strong> legal services, or the administration <strong>of</strong><br />

justice. Even in such instances, however, a judge should assess the appropriateness <strong>of</strong> accepting an<br />

appointment, paying particular attention to the subject matter <strong>of</strong> the appointment and the availability<br />

and allocation <strong>of</strong> judicial resources, including the judge’s time commitments, and giving due regard<br />

to the requirements <strong>of</strong> the independence and impartiality <strong>of</strong> the judiciary.<br />

[2] A judge may represent his or her country, state, or locality on ceremonial occasions or in<br />

connection with historical, educational, or cultural activities. Such representation does not constitute<br />

acceptance <strong>of</strong> a government position.<br />

[Court Order April 30, 2010, effective May 3, 2010]<br />

Rule 51:3.5: USE OF NONPUBLIC INFORMATION<br />

A judge shall not intentionally disclose or use nonpublic information* acquired in a judicial<br />

capacity for any purpose unrelated to the judge’s judicial duties.<br />

Comment<br />

[1] In the course <strong>of</strong> performing judicial duties, a judge may acquire information <strong>of</strong> commercial or<br />

other value that is unavailable to the public. The judge must not reveal or use such information for<br />

personal gain or for any purpose unrelated to his or her judicial duties.<br />

[2] This rule is not intended, however, to affect a judge’s ability to act on information as necessary<br />

to protect the health or safety <strong>of</strong> any individual if consistent with other provisions <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Iowa</strong> Code<br />

<strong>of</strong> Judicial Conduct.<br />

[Court Order April 30, 2010, effective May 3, 2010]<br />

Rule 51:3.6: AFFILIATION WITH DISCRIMINATORY ORGANIZATIONS<br />

(A) A judge shall not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious<br />

discrimination on the basis <strong>of</strong> race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, or sexual<br />

orientation. A judge’s membership in a religious organization as a lawful exercise <strong>of</strong> the<br />

freedom <strong>of</strong> religion is not prohibited.<br />

(B) A judge shall not use the benefits or facilities <strong>of</strong> an organization if the judge knows*<br />

or should know that the organization practices invidious discrimination on one or more<br />

<strong>of</strong> the bases identified in paragraph (A). A judge’s attendance at an event in a facility <strong>of</strong><br />

an organization that the judge is not permitted to join is not a violation <strong>of</strong> this rule when<br />

the judge’s attendance is an isolated event that could not reasonably be perceived as an<br />

endorsement <strong>of</strong> the organization’s practices.<br />

Comment<br />

[1] A judge’s public manifestation <strong>of</strong> approval <strong>of</strong> invidious discrimination on any basis gives rise<br />

to the appearance <strong>of</strong> impropriety and diminishes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality<br />

<strong>of</strong> the judiciary. A judge’s membership in an organization that practices invidious discrimination<br />

creates the perception that the judge’s impartiality is impaired.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!