Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam Practice Question
A judge is invited to join a local sports show to discuss team performances. The judge receives a small stipend for each appearance and avoids topics tied to ongoing or later legal matters. Which statement best reflects the proper standard for this outside activity?
Receiving a stipend heightens impartiality concerns because compensation influences a judge’s neutrality.
Participating in a different location addresses conflict concerns but does not resolve broader ethics implications.
Attending a local sports show will show favoritism toward a team and therefore is inappropriate.
The judge’s involvement is suitable while maintaining public confidence in independence.
Financial arrangements demand scrutiny to preserve confidence in a judge’s impartiality. The first statement recognizes a modest payment but highlights the need to maintain independence. The second statement focuses on location but overlooks overall ethics considerations. The third statement presumes compensation itself shifts neutrality, ignoring cases where modest stipends do not compromise public trust.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What rules govern judges' outside activities?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What constitutes a conflict of interest for judges?