Conference of Court Public Information Officers (CCPIO) Annual Conference.
The Conference of Court Public Information Officers holds its Annual Conference at the Tallahassee Hilton Doubletree in Tallahassee, Florida from August 2-5, 2020. Contact: Shelley Rockwell or Ann Repeta.
Postponed - ICM course focuses on court communications.
Participants for ICM’s course, Public Relations (CCE), will explore the tools that can be used to promote community engagement and increase public trust and confidence as well as educate staff about walking the fine line between providingl legal advice vs. legal information. The course will take place April 16-17, 2020 in Columbus, Oh.
Kentucky Judicial Ethics Opinion JE-119, Judges` Membership on Internet-Based Social Networking Sites. Ethics Committee of Kentucky Judiciary (Jan. 20, 2010). This ethics opinion addresses the question, “May a Kentucky Judge or Justice, consistent with the Code of Judicial Conduct, participate in an internet-based social networking site, such as Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, or Twitter, and be “friends” with various persons who appear before the judge in court, such as attorneys, social workers, and/or law enforcement officials?" The Ethics Committee concluded that the current answer is a "qualified yes." See the full opinion for details.
Advisory Opinion 08-176. Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics (Jan. 29, 2009). This opinion states, "Provided that the judge otherwise complies with the Rules Governing Judicial Conduct, he/she may join and make use of an Internet-based social network. A judge choosing to do so should exercise an appropriate degree of discretion in how he/she uses the social network and should stay abreast of the features of any such service he/she uses as new developments may impact his/her duties under the Rules."
In Opinion 13-39, dated May 28, 2013, the Committee held "that the mere status of being a "Facebook friend," without more, is an insufficient basis to require recusal. Nor does the committee believe that a judge's impartiality may reasonably be questioned (see 22 NYCRR 100.3[E]) or that there is an appearance of impropriety (see 22 NYCRR 100.2[A]) based solely on having previously "friended" certain individuals who are now involved in some manner in a pending action."