US Nepotism Restrictions for State Legislators Resources in United States
US Nepotism Restrictions for State Legislators Resources
The Center for Ethics in Government – UPDATED June, 2008–reflects statutes in effect as of 12/31/07
This table is intended to provide general information and does not necessarily address all aspects of this topic. Because the facts of each situation may vary, this information may need to be supplemented by consulting legal advisors. It reflects in summary form statutes in effect as of 12/31/07 or statutes set to take effect shortly thereafter.
Nearly half the states prohibit a legislator from hiring a relative either through statute or by constitution. In states where the practice is not prohibited, states have conflict-of-interest laws, which may restrict nepotism depending on interpretation of the law. Many states regulate the degree of relationship between legislators and the relative they wish to hire. A number of states with no specific nepotism prohibition, however, have established hiring guidelines for legislators.
Massachusetts and Pennsylvania are among the states where statutes do not specifically prohibit nepotism, but where ethics commissions interpret their conflict-of-interest law as prohibiting the practice.
Key to 50-state table:
| State | Policy | Statutory Reference |
| Alabama | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. | Ala. Code §36-25-5Definitions:Ala. Code §36-25-1 |
| Alaska | Individuals related to a legislator, including spousal equivalents, may not be employed for compensation during session by an agency established in AS 24.20, by the house in which the legislator is a member, during the interim in either house, or, whether for compensation or not, by the committee. | Alaska Stat. §24.60.090 |
| Arizona | Illegal for any legislator to appoint or vote for appointment anyone within 3rd degree of affinity or consanguinity to any clerkship, office, position, employment in department of the state where legislator is a member. A legislator who knowingly gives or offers any gratuity or reward in consideration that he, or any other person (i.e. a relative), be appointed to a public office is guilty of a class 6 felony. | Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §38-481, §38-465Definitions:
Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §38-101 |
| Arkansas | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition, unless a legislator is a member of a state board or commission. A person related, by consanguinity or affinity, in the second degree to a member of a state board or commission shall not be eligible for appointment or employment to the board or commission. Applies only to persons appointed or hired after July 28, 1995. |
Ark. Stat. Ann. § 21-8-101 |
| California | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition.Potential conflicts should be submitted to Joint Ethics Committee for determination of conflict of interest. | Ca. Govt. Code § 8940, §8920, §8922.a |
| Colorado | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. Member of assembly should submit written request to Board of Ethics for determination of potential conflict. |
Colo.Rev. Stat. §24-18 |
| Connecticut | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. Statute prescribes standards of conduct for legislators, but does not directly address nepotism. |
Conn. Gen. Stat.§10-1-84 (f) & (I) |
| Delaware | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. There is no specific anti-nepotism statute in Delaware; however, no state employee, officer or honorary state official may review or dispose of any matter pending before the State in which any action or inaction would result in financial benefit or detriment to a close relative to a greater extent then such benefit or detriment would accrue to others who are members of the same class or group of persons. They also may not review or dispose of matters in which a close relative has a financial interest in a private enterprise if action or inaction would affect the private enterprise to a lesser or greater extent than like enterprises. |
Del. Code Ann. Tit. 29, § 5801 |
| Florida | Legislators may not appoint, employ, promote, or advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, or promotion of a relative into a position within the department where the legislator serves. Legislator may not exercise jurisdiction or control over department where relative is hired. Exception is made for legislators’ relatives employed as pages or messengers during sessions. | Fla. Stat. § 112.3135,§ 112.313(4)
Definitions: Fla. Stat. § 112.3135 |
| Georgia | A legislator is prohibited from advocating for or causing advancement, appointment, employment, promotion or transfer of a member of his or her family to an office or position as defined in 45-1-4, that pays an annual salary of $10,000 or more. | Ga. Code §45-10-80 (Effective 1/9/06)Definition: Ga. Code §21-5-3, and Sec. 45-1-4 |
| Hawaii | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition.There is no specific provision concerning nepotism; however, other provisions of the ethics code may apply to situations that involve nepotism. For example, legislators and employees are prohibited from using their official positions to grant unwarranted privileges or advantages to others. This could prohibit the use of one’s state office to grant preferential treatment to family members or relatives. | Hawaii Rev. Stat. §84 |
| Idaho | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. Elected official must disclose potential conflicts in writing before the fact to attorney for the entity for opinion as to legality. |
Idaho Code §59-702, 59-704Definitions: Idaho Code §59-703 |
| Illinois | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition.There is no specific provision concerning nepotism; however, other provisions of the ethics code may apply to situations that involve nepotism. For example, the statute saying “no legislator may engage in conduct which is unbecoming to a legislator, or which constitutes a breach of the public trust,” could be construed to include nepotism. | Ill. Rev. Stat. Ch 5 ILCS 420/3-107 |
| Indiana | No person related to a legislator shall be eligible to any position in the same department, office, or institution, nor may any relative be placed in a direct supervisory-subordinate relationship. Exceptions are made for individuals employed at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the appointment of his or her relative as the head of their department, office, or institution. The legislative ethics committee will act as an advisory body to individual members of the appropriate house on questions relating to conflicts of interest. | Ind. Code §4-15-7-1,§2-2.1-3-1 |
| Iowa | General ethical considerations. Legislators are exempt from general governmental nepotism prohibition. General governmental nepotism prohibition exempts legislators from hiring clerks or assistants. |
Iowa Code §2-71.1, §2-68B.2 |
| Kansas | Legislators cannot advocate or cause the employment, appointment, promotion, transfer, advancement, or discipline of any member of such officer’s or employee’s household or family. | Kan. Stat. Ann. §46-246a |
| Kentucky | Prohibition against employment, appointment, promotion, transfer, or disciplining of a legislator’s family member to an office or position in the legislative branch of state government. Prohibition from advocating or causing the employment of a family member in the executive branch. Exceptions made if relative is employed prior to the legislator’s election to the General Assembly or prior to February 18, 1993. Penalty is ethical misconduct. | Ky. Rev. Stat. §6.754 |
| Louisiana | No legislator may hire a member of their family as his or her legislative assistant. | La. Rev. Stat. Ann.§24:31.5 (3) |
| Maine | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. Where a legislator or a member of his immediate family accepts or engages in employment which “could impair the Legislator’s judgment”, it will be a conflict of interest. |
Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. Tit.1§ 1014 |
| Maryland | A legislator may not employ one’s own relative or a relative of another legislator from the same district, unless the legislator’s physical impairment requires hiring of specific relatives. | Md. State Govt. Code Ann. §2-107 |
| Massachusetts | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition in statute. The following language “a legislator may not participate in a particular matter in which to his knowledge his immediate family or partner has any arrangement concerning prospective employment or has a financial interest” can be interpreted by the MA Ethics Commission to be a prohibition against nepotism. Punishment will be a fine or not more than three thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than two years, or both. | Mass. Gen. Laws Ann.Ch. 268A.6 |
| Michigan | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. The Ethics Code prescribes standards of conduct for legislators, but does not directly address nepotism. |
Mich. Comp. Laws §15.342 |
| Minnesota | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed in a written statement to the presiding officer of the body of service. |
Minn. Stat. §10A.07 |
| Mississippi | It is unlawful for a legislator to appoint or employ, as an officer, clerk, stenographer, deputy, or assistant to be paid out of the public funds, any person related by blood or marriage within the third degree. Exceptions are made for employees hired prior to legislators’ election, and to any person seeking appointment as an election worker.A legislator may request confidential opinions from the Attorney General as to ethical situation concerning individual legislator. | Miss. Code Ann. §25-1-53, §25-4-18 |
| Missouri | The Missouri Constitution prohibits the appointing authority (i.e. a legislator) from appointing a relative with the fourth degree of consanguinity. | Mo. Constitution, Art VII § 6 |
| Montana | Legislators cannot hire or appoint anyone related or connected “by consanguinity (blood) within the fourth degree or by affinity within the second degree” There are exceptions, under certain circumstances, for election judges, legislative staff and pages, certain sheriff’s employees and school district appointees. Another exception allows renewals of employment contracts when a relative was hired before the official was employed/appointed. | Mont. Code Ann.§ 2-2-301,302,303,304
Definitions: Mont. Code Ann. §1-1-219, §2-2-105(3) |
| Nebraska | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. | Neb. Rev. Stat. §49-1401 through §49-1443 |
| Nevada | A legislator cannot employ, in any capacity, any relative of such person who is within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity. | Nev. Rev. Stat. §281.481 and §281.210 |
| New Hampshire | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition.Legislative Ethics Committee has power to investigate complaints and discipline for wrongdoing. | New Hampshire General Court Ethics Guidelines and Procedural Rules |
| New Jersey | A legislator cannot employ a relative in the legislator’s district office. Otherwise, general ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. No State officer should use his official position to secure unwarranted advantages for himself or others. |
N.J. Rev. Stat. Sec.52:11-5.1N.J. Rev. Stat. §52:13D-23 |
| New Mexico | No employment of persons related by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree, unless first approved by the person whose duty it is to approve the bond of the legislator giving such employment. Exemptions are made if the compensation of the relative is $600 a year, or less. | N.M. Stat. Ann. §10-1-10 |
| New York | No statewide elected official, state officer or employee, member of the legislature or legislative employee may participate in any decision to hire, promote, discipline or discharge a relative for any compensated position at, for or within any state agency, public authority or the legislature. | N.Y. Public Officers Law§ 73-8(a) |
| North Carolina | Prohibits a legislator or legislative employee from influencing an extended family member’s employment or advancement to a state office or a position supervised by a public servant (except for certain General Assembly positions). State agencies may adopt more stringent ethics guidelines. Current examples of guidelines include those adopted by the Department of Transportation and the State Lottery Commission. | G.S. 138A-40 |
| North Dakota | A legislator may not serve in a supervisory capacity over spouse, child, stepchild, brother or sister-in-law, or son or daughter-in-law | N.D. Cent. Code §44-04-09 |
| Ohio | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition in statute. However the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) has established a statewide nepotism policy, which applies to legislators. According to DAS, legislators shall not employ or supervise any person closely related by blood, marriage or other significant relationship in his or her department. §2921.42(A)(1) does prohibit a legislator from securing authorization of any “public contract” in which he or a member of his family holds an interest. §102.03(D) prohibits a legislator using his or her authority or influence of office to secure anything of value or the promise of anything of value (i.e. a job) that would use improper influence of a legislator. |
Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §2921.42(A)(1),§ 102.03(D), Ohio Ethics Opinion, 90-010 |
| Oklahoma | Illegal for any person within third degree of affinity or consanguinity to any elected member of legislature to hold any paying position within the same office where the legislator is a member. Divorce terminates any previously existing relationship by affinity or consanguinity. | Okla. Stat. Tit.21, §481 and §484 |
| Oregon | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition.No public official shall use official position for personal gain, or in any way not available to any other person. | Or. Rev. Stat. §244.040 |
| Pennsylvania | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition in statute, however the Office of Administration provides nepotism guidelines. The Management Directive provides a guideline saying that legislators shall not exercise direct and immediate supervisory authority over a family member. The PA Ethics Commission can view the following language has a nepotism prohibition, “no member shall participate as a principal in any transaction involving the Commonwealth or any Commonwealth agency in which he, his spouse or child, has a substantial personal economic interest (Pa. Cons. Stat. 143.5 ( c ). | Pa. Cons. Stat. Tit.46,§ 143.1, Governor’s Management Directive 13.33 |
| Rhode Island | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. Public officials may not participate in matters concerning family members including parents, grandparents, siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews or cousins, whether by blood or marriage. |
R.I. Gen. Laws §36-14-1Rhode Island Constitution, Article III, Sections 7 and 8 |
| South Carolina | No legislator may cause the appointment, promotion, transfer, or advancement of a family member to a state or local office or position he or she supervises or manages, nor can he or she participate in an action relating to discipline of a family member. | S.C. Code Ann. §8-13-750, Human Resource Regulations: 19-707.01Definitions: S.C. Code Ann. § 2-17-10 & §8-13-100 |
| South Dakota | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition applicable to legislators. | S.D. Codified Laws Ann.§2-12 |
| Tennessee | “Tennessee General Assembly Uniform Nepotism Policy Act of 2006”.As used in this part, unless the context otherwise requires, “relative”means a parent, foster parent, parent-in-law, child, spouse, brother, foster brother, sister, foster sister, grandparent, grandchild, son-in-law, brother-in-law, daughter-in-law, sister-in-law, or other family member who resides in the same household. Within the general assembly, no employees who are relatives shall be placed within the same direct line of supervision whereby one (1) relative is responsible for supervising the job performance or work activities of another relative. Any conflicts to this policy caused by marriage shall be resolved by transfer whenever possible. The nepotism policy is not retroactive. | Tennessee General Assembly Uniform Nepotism Policy Act of 2006 |
| Texas | Legislators are prohibited from confirming, appointing or voting for an individual related within the third degree by consanguinity or within the second degree by affinity.Chapter 573 of the Government Code is not administered or enforced by the Commission. The Attorney General has statutory authority to issue opinions concerning nepotism laws to certain individuals under Government Code sections 402.042 and 402.043. | Tex. Governmental Code Ann. § 573.041Definitions: Tex. Governmental Code Ann. § 573.001-573.025 |
| Utah | Employment of relatives is prohibited. Each day of violation is considered a separate misdemeanor offense. Exceptions are made for small towns and rural areas. See statute for other exceptions. | Utah Code Ann. § 52-3-1 to §52-3-4 |
| Vermont | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition in statute, however the state’s Legislative Council promotes a nepotism policy, which applies to legislators. The state’s Legislative Council promotes a general unwritten policy not to hire immediate family of current legislators. |
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. § 251-258 |
| Virginia | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. | Va. Code § 40.2 |
| Washington | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition in statute, however the legislature’s internal hiring policy has established a nepotism prohibition, which applies to legislators.While not prohibited in state statute, the hiring policy of the House and Senate restricts the hiring or supervising by a legislator of parents, spouses, siblings, or children. State law is ambiguous, saying “a state officer or employee may not use his or her position to secure special privileges or exemptions for himself or herself, or his or her spouse, child, parents, or other persons.” State officers and employees may also not have a beneficial interest in a contract. | Wash. Rev. Code §42.52 |
| West Virginia | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. Nepotism could be construed to be covered by a general prohibition against improper use of office for private gain. |
W.Va. Code §6B-2-5Definitions: § 6B-1-2 |
| Wisconsin | General ethical considerations, but no specific prohibition. No legislator may use his or her public position or office to obtain financial gain or anything of substantial value for the private benefit of himself or herself or his or her immediate family. |
Wis. Stat. §19.41-45Definitions: Wis. Stat. §19.42 |
| Wyoming | No legislator shall advocate or cause the employment, appointment, promotion, transfer, or advancement of a family member to an office or position of the state, a county, municipality, or a school district. Similarly, public officials, public members, and public employees are prohibited from supervising or managing a family member and are prohibited from participating in any matter relating to the employment or discipline of a family member. The penalty is misdemeanor or termination from office. | Wyo. Stat. §9-13-104, Executive Order 1997Definitions: Wyo. Stat. § 9-13-102 (a) (xiv) and (xvi) |
This chart does not include nepotism restrictions for legislators’ relatives contracting with the state or municipalities. Research only applies to nepotism restrictions as they apply to state legislators.
Leave a Reply