Thread by @ZoeTillman

Significant new advisory opinion from the federal judiciary's ethics committee (sent out by Sen. Whitehouse), re: participation by judges, law clerks, and soon-to-be law clerks in educational seminars held and sponsored by outside groups: whitehouse.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/…

The opinion notes that the lines have become harder to define in figuring out which groups/events are ethically okay: "Organizations that were once clearly engaged in efforts to educate judges and lawyers have become increasingly involved in contentious public policy
debates."

Here are all the factors judges are supposed to consider when deciding if participation in a particular event is okay. #9 is notable, since it gets into the murkey area of what the public perceives (judges are instructed to be mindful of perception of bias as much as actual bias)

One section notes that even if the group holding a seminar doesn't engage in litigation, judges have to be mindful of who the sponsors are, and if they engage in litigation or political activity. If the judge doesn't know who the sponsors, they should do more digging, or decline

Another line of note: "When a judge engages in law related activity with political overtones, a judge should consider whether the express or implied values of other canons will be contravened."

"Political overtones" is a broad term that could be interepreted different ways

Resuming this thread: The opinion doesn't mention groups by name and say, "this is okay" or "this is bad." Judges get significant discretion to make these sorts of decisions. But it's notable that the committee felt there was a need to weigh in here

The opinion doesn't conclusively answer the Q of, is it okay for judges to be at events for groups with ideological leanings and political ties — like Fed Soc and American Const. Society. But it seems intended to give judges pause on things that maybe were an easy "yes" before