The Commission has been asked for an opinion as to whether it would be proper for a judge to serve as a member of the Advisory Board of a local unit of The Salvation Army. Rule 3.7(B) provides in pertinent part as follows:
(B) Judges may participate in educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic activities that do not reflect adversely upon their impartiality or interfere with the performance of their judicial duties.
(1) Judges may serve as officers, directors, trustees, or non-legal advisors of educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations not conducted for the economic or political advantage of their members, subject to the following limitations:
(a) judges shall not serve if it is likely that the organization will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before them;
(b) judges shall not serve if it is likely that the organization will be regularly engaged in adversary proceedings in any court; and
(c) judges shall not give investment advice to such an organization, but they may serve on its board of directors or trustees and 37 participate in its management, even when governance includes the responsibility for approving investment decisions.
Subject to the restrictions and limitations above stated, there would appear to be no reason that the judge should not serve on the Advisory Board of the local unit of The Salvation Army, and the question submitted does not indicate that these restrictions would present any problem, but care should be exercised that they are not violated in fact.
[Pertinent Code of Judicial Conduct provisions: Rules 2.4(B), 3.7(B)(2). Cross reference to other relevant opinions for review: #15, #17, #24, #37, #43, #117, #133, #138, #139, #145, #146, #161, #164, #186.]