Vt. Admin. Ord. Of. Sup. Ct. 2.10
Comment
[1] This Rule's restrictions on judicial speech are essential to the maintenance of the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary.
[2] This Rule does not prohibit a judge from commenting on proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity. In cases in which the judge is a litigant in an official capacity, such as a writ of mandamus, the judge must not comment publicly.
[3] Depending upon the circumstances, the judge should consider whether it may be preferable for a third party, rather than the judge, to respond or issue statements in connection with allegations concerning the judge's conduct in a matter.
Reporter's Notes
Rule 2.10(A), (C)-(D) carry forward Vermont Code 1994, Canon 3B(9), with some changes for clarity. Rule 2.10(B), taken from ABA Code 2007, did not appear in Vermont Code 1994, Canon 3B, but makes generally applicable the language of Vermont Code 1994, Canon 5B(4)(a), prohibiting the making of such statements by a candidate for judicial office. Vermont Code 1994, Canon 3B(10), concerning judicial interaction with jurors, was adapted from ABA Code 1990, Canon 3B(11); it is carried forward as Rule 2.8(C). See Reporter's Notes to that rule. Rule 2.10(E) is a new provision in ABA Code 2007 intended to make clear that a judge may respond to challenges to the judge's conduct if the response does not affect the fairness of a proceeding. ABA Reporter's Explanation 103.
Comments [1] and [2] are derived from the Commentary to ABA Code 1990, Canon 3B(9), (10). New Comment [3], suggesting that a third person may defend a judge, is intended to minimize direct discussion by a judge with the media. ABA Reporter's Explanation 103.