Judicial Conduct Canon 2: Performing the duties of judicial office impartially, competently, and diligently

When it applies

This comes up whenever an MPRE question describes a judge acting on the bench, handling a case, communicating with parties outside a hearing, or managing a courtroom, as opposed to questions about a judge's outside political or personal conduct, which fall under other canons.

What the rule requires

• Judges must uphold and apply the law faithfully and impartially, without regard to personal views or public pressure.
• Judges must perform duties fairly, avoiding bias or prejudice based on protected characteristics or other improper factors, and must require lawyers and staff to do the same.
• Judges must be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others, and must require similar conduct from those under their direction.
• Judges must dispose of judicial matters promptly, efficiently, and without unnecessary delay.
• Judges must avoid ex parte communications about pending or impending matters except in narrowly defined circumstances. When a permitted scheduling, administrative, or emergency contact occurs, or when an unauthorized communication about the substance of a matter is inadvertently received, the judge must promptly notify the other parties of its substance and give them an opportunity to respond.
• Judges must maintain professional competence in judicial duties, including staying current on the law and court administration.

Exceptions

• Ex parte communication is allowed for scheduling, administrative, or emergency purposes that do not address substantive matters, but only if the judge reasonably believes no party will gain a procedural, substantive, or tactical advantage and the judge promptly notifies all other parties of the substance of the communication and gives them an opportunity to respond.
• Ex parte communication with a law clerk or court staff for internal deliberation is permitted.
• With the parties' consent, a judge may confer separately with the parties and their lawyers in an effort to settle pending matters. Separately, ex parte communication is allowed when expressly authorized by law.

How the MPRE tests Judicial Conduct Canon 2

• Students conflate personal bias (Canon 2) with disqualification for financial or relationship conflicts, which is more specifically addressed under separate disqualification rules within Canon 2.
• Students think any ex parte contact is automatically forbidden, missing the administrative/emergency/consent-based exceptions.
• Students forget the duty extends to controlling the conduct of lawyers and staff in the judge's presence, not just the judge's own behavior.
• Students confuse "impartiality" (no bias in decision-making) with "independence," which belongs to Canon 1's broader integrity concerns.