Mass. Code Jud. Conduct R. 3.6

History

Comment [1] A judge’s public manifestation of approval of invidious discrimination diminishes public confidence in the integrityDefinitionProbity, fairness, honesty, uprightness, and soundness of character. See Rules 1.2, 2.7, 2.10, 2.15, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.7, 3.12, and 3.13. and impartialityDefinitionAbsence of bias or prejudice in favor of, or against, particular parties or classes of parties or their representatives, as well as maintenance of an open mind in considering issues that may come before a judge. See Rules 1.2, 2.2, 2.10, 2.11, 2.13, 3.1, 3.4, 3.6, 3.7, 3.12, 3.13, 3.14, and 4.1. of the judiciary. A judge’s membership in an organization that practices invidious discrimination similarly diminishes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. [2] Whether an organization practices invidious discrimination is a complex question to which judges must be attentive. The answer cannot be determined from a mere examination of an organization’s current membership rolls, but 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 that do not stigmatize any excluded persons as inferior and therefore unworthy of membership. The purpose of this Rule is to prohibit judges from joining organizations practicing invidious discrimination, whether or not an organization’s membership practices are constitutionally protected. When a judge learns that an organization to which the judge belongs engages in invidious discrimination, the judge must resign immediately from the organization. [3] Whether an organization engages in invidious discrimination is a threshold issue but not the end of the judge’s inquiry. Even an organization that does not engage in invidious discrimination may engage in practices such that a judge’s membership in the organization might erode public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. Before holding membership in any organization, a judge must consider whether membership would appear to undermine the judge's impartiality in the eyes of a reasonable litigant. See Rules 3.1 and 3.7. [4] A judge’s membership in a religious organization as a lawful exercise of the freedom of religion is not a violation of this Rule. [5] This Rule does not apply to national or state military service. Adopted October 8, 2015, effective January 1, 2016