Deferred Associates May Serve As Judicial Interns

…the principal focus of this program is to serve the needs of theunderstaffed Trial Court and the people it serves, mitigating theeffects of a severe shortage in law clerks that the Trial Court facesbeginning in September 2009 as a result of the economic crisis andbudget cuts. Any private benefit to the law firms involved is secondaryto that benefit, and it is no different from the benefit to any lawfirm which has hired an associate in the ordinary course whosestart-date follows the completion of a judicial clerkship…

          Second, your inquiry raises the issue of whether thevolunteer interns are a “gift” or “favor” to the judges of the TrialCourt from the law firms. Section 4D(5) prohibits a judge fromaccepting “a gift, bequest, favor, or loan from anyone except for”certain situations, none of which applies here. TheCommittee is of the opinion that, even if the volunteer interns aregifts or favors from the law firms to the judges of the Trial Court,they are permissible under the Code given the double blind structure ofthe proposed program. “The Code must be read as a whole. . . . [and][t]he Canons and Sections are rules of reason. Some conduct that mayliterally violate a provision of the Code [i.e., Section 4D(5)(h) here]will be permissible because it does not violate the policy behind theprohibition or is de minimis.” Preamble to the Code. As concluded forthe reasons described in this opinion, a disinterestedobjective observer would not question the impartiality of the judges ofthe Trial Court when the law firms donating the volunteer internsappear before the judges. The program therefore would not violate thepolicy behind Section 4D(5)(h) and is permissible under the Code.