The extent to which judges should be involved in fundraising for civic and charitable causes is an important issue of judicial ethics. The default rule adopted by judicial councils in Canada precludes judges from fundraising subject to only minor exceptions. Yet anecdotal evidence indicates that Canadian judges fundraise in breach of this rule. This raises the question of whether there should be a change to the rule so as to allow judges greater scope for fundraising activities. The aim of this paper is to review the ethical rules for judicial fundraising and evaluate whether they require modifications for the modern Canadian judiciary. As comparative law the paper will look at the law in the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia.