Judicial ethics panel clears judges to join sponsored trip to Israel
Florida’s judicial ethics panel says judges may accept reasonable expense reimbursements for participating in educational trips or other extrajudicial activities — including those not directly related to the law — as long as such involvement doesn’t compromise their impartiality or violate reporting rules.
The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee acted April 6 in Opinion Number: 2025-08.
The ethics panel was asked by a judge, a former assistant U.S. attorney, who has been invited by former colleagues to participate in a trip to Israel, to be partially sponsored by three non-profit organizations that each focus on Jewish-related issues. These sponsoring organizations pay for all hotel and other “on-the-ground” travel costs for participants, except for airfare. The purpose of the trip is for the participants to meet with various government and non-government officials, with a “goal of raising awareness of the challenges and concerns faced by the Israeli people and otherwise combatting antisemitism through education.”
Approximately 15-20 people will be participating, comprised of current and former AUSAs. However, the sponsoring organizations note that they do also sponsor other academic and professional groups for such trips.
As an overview, the JEAC said Canon 5B of the Code of Judicial Conduct generally encourages judges “to speak, write, lecture, teach and participate in other extrajudicial activities concerning non-legal subjects, subject to the requirements of this Code.” However, while judges may participate in extrajudicial activities, such as the proposed trip to Israel, in doing so, Canon 5A(1) prohibits any involvement with various advocacy organizations that may “cast reasonable doubt on the judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge,” the panel said citing earlier opinions.
To avoid the appearance of impropriety, the panel notes Canon 2B states: “A judge shall not allow family, social, political or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment.”
“In the present case, the proposed trip to Israel does not appear to involve any type of advocacy on the part of the sponsors that would potentially prohibit the inquiring judge’s participation; engaging in antisemitism awareness events and related activities as educational endeavors would not appear to raise concerns of resulting bias on the part of the participating judge,” the judicial ethics panel held. “Nor would the sponsors, as non-profit organizations, be likely to appear as parties before the inquiring judge in the future. Therefore, the Canons would permit the inquiring judge to participate in the proposed trip to Israel as an extrajudicial activity.”
Regarding financial compensation for extrajudicial activities, the committee has given its prior approval, under several different factual scenarios, for judges to accept compensation for expenses related to lecturing, or even merely attending, various law-related functions.
For example, the committee in the past has approved of judges receiving free meals for attending county bar association meetings, as well as receiving compensation for hotel and food costs related to a speaking engagement with a lawyers’ association for expenses related to a lecture to non-attorneys on landlord-tenant law and for expenses related to speaking at continuing legal education panel discussions, whether conducted by a private nongovernmental organization or a private corporation.
“Turning to the issue presented, whether a judge may ethically receive financial compensation associated with participation in other extra judicial activities that are not specifically law-related, such as the proposed trip to Israel, Canon 6A of the Code of Judicial Conduct specifically addresses, and generally authorizes, such compensation associated with the judge’s participation — provided the source of the compensation does not give the appearance of influencing the judge in the performance of judicial duties or otherwise give the appearance of impropriety,” said JEAC, noting however that Canon 6A(1) provides that any such compensation “shall not exceed a reasonable amount nor shall it exceed what a person who is not a judge would receive,” and Canon 6A(3) specifies that any compensation “shall be limited to the actual cost of travel, food, and lodging reasonably incurred by the judge and, where appropriate to the occasion, to the judge’s spouse. Any payment in excess of such an amount is compensation and is reportable as income under Canon 6B(1).”
Canon 6A(3) further directs that any compensation from sources other than the state or a judicial branch entity exceeding $100 shall be reported pursuant to Canon 6B(2), and therefore the inquiring judge must report the financial compensation received from the non-state, non-judicial branch, sponsors of the trip.
The Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee is charged with rendering advisory opinions to judges and judicial candidates on the application of the Code of Judicial Conduct to their circumstances. While judges and candidates may cite the opinion as evidence of good faith, the opinions are not binding on the Judicial Qualifications Commission.
