MSBA supports the Minnesota Lavender Bar Association’s response to the advisory opinion issued by the Board on Judicial Standards regarding judicial participation in Twin Cities Pride events.

The Minnesota State Bar Association (MSBA) supports the Minnesota Lavender Bar Association’s (MLBA) response to the recent advisory opinion issued by the Board on Judicial Standards (BJS) regarding judicial participation in Twin Cities Pride events. View June 9, 2025 letter from MSBA. 

As MLBA outlines in its compelling letter (View May 30, 2025 letter from MLBA), the advisory opinion’s conclusion that judges should refrain from participating in Pride events—based on concerns over perceived partiality—rests on an untenable and troubling interpretation of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct. Pride events are celebrations of inclusion and community, not political endorsements or partisan activity. To single them out as ethically suspect, while judges regularly participate in events celebrating other historically marginalized groups (e.g., Black History Month, Women’s History Month), sends an alarming message of exclusion to LGBTQ+ individuals.

A core value of the Minnesota State Bar Association is advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion in the legal profession and the justice system. That commitment includes supporting efforts to build trust with communities that have historically been marginalized or underserved by the courts. Judicial visibility at events like Twin Cities Pride affirms the judiciary’s dedication to those principles and fosters public confidence that our justice system is open, welcoming, and fair to all.

The advisory opinion not only risks undermining public confidence in a judiciary that should reflect the diversity of the public it serves, but also hampers the important efforts of the Minnesota State Bar Association, district bars, affinity bars and judicial committees to promote equal access and build public trust. The suggestion that participation in Pride may require judicial recusal in cases involving LGBTQ+ individuals is unsupported and inconsistent with guidance from other states. Colorado, New York, Massachusetts, and Connecticut have all affirmed that judges may participate in Pride celebrations consistent with judicial ethics, so long as such participation does not involve political endorsement or fundraising.

Furthermore, the opinion discounts the core mission of Equal Justice Committees and their role in eliminating bias and advancing equity in our courts—efforts that plainly relate to “the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice” as referenced in Rule 3.1(E).

We urge the Board to reconsider and withdraw the opinion. Judges should be encouraged—not discouraged—to be visible participants in efforts that strengthen public confidence in the fairness and openness of the courts to all.