Code of Conduct US Judges: Proposed changes on discrimination and religion:

This press release reports: "The Committee on Codes of Conduct of the Judicial Conference of the United States seeks public comments on proposed revisions to the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. The proposed revisions are based in large part on revisions adopted by the American Bar Association in February 2007, amending the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct."  Links to the proposed revisions are provided.  Hat tip: How Appealing blog

Proposed Canon -

_________________________

CANON 2: A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES

C. A judge should not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination.

Canon 2C. A judge’s public manifestation of approval of invidious discrimination gives rise to the appearance of impropriety under Canon 2 and diminishes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary in violation of Canon 2A. Membership of a judge in an organization that practices invidious discrimination creates a perception that the judge’s impartiality is impaired. Invidious discrimination will generally be demonstrated if an
organization’s exclusionary membership practices are arbitrary, irrational, or the result of hostility or animus toward an identifiable group. Whether an organization practices invidious discrimination is often a complex question.
The answer cannot be determined from a mere examination of an organization’s current membership rolls but rather depends on how the organization selects members and other relevant factors, such as the organization’s purpose, size, and nature, including whether the organization is dedicated to preserving religious, ethnic or cultural values of legitimate common interest to members, or is an intimate, purely private association entitled to constitutional protection. The mere absence of diverse membership does not by itself demonstrate invidious discrimination. A
judge’s membership in a religious organization as a lawful exercise of the freedom of religion does not violate this Canon. This Canon does not apply to national or state military service.

It would also violate Canons 2 and 2A for a judge to arrange an event at a club that the judge knows practices invidious discrimination in its membership or other policies, or for the judge to use such a club regularly. However, attendance at an event in a facility of such an organization is not a violation when the judge’s attendance is an isolated occurrence that could not reasonably be perceived as an endorsement of the organization’s practices.

When a judge determines that an organization to which the judge belongs engages in invidious discrimination that would preclude membership under this Canon, the judge should resign immediately from the organization.