Ethics & social media: what judges need to know

Why social media matters for judges

Judges hold positions of great responsibility, and their words and actions — both in and out of the courtroom — shape public trust in the judiciary. Social media allows judges to stay informed, engage with their communities, and share important court updates. However, it also poses risks. A single post, like, or comment can be misinterpreted and lead to ethical concerns. Judges must navigate these platforms with caution to uphold judicial integrity.

Ethics rules apply to social media

The American Bar Association's Model Code of Judicial Conduct (Rule 1.3) states:

"A judge shall not abuse the prestige of judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests of the judge or others, or allow others to do so."

While this rule predates social media, courts have ruled that it applies to online activity. Judges cannot use their position to promote businesses, political candidates, or charitable causes. Even posts meant for family and friends can lead to ethical violations if they suggest bias or favoritism.

State-specific guidance

Courts across the country are strengthening policies to ensure judges do not misuse their status online.

• The California Supreme Court added commentary to its judicial ethics code, warning judges to exercise caution with electronic communication, including social media (California Code of Judicial Ethics, Canon 2A).
• The Connecticut Probate Assembly advised judges to use extreme caution on social media, noting that online activity is especially problematic due to its accessibility and permanence (Code of Probate Judicial Conduct, Rule 3.1).
• The Illinois Supreme Court explicitly included social media in its judicial conduct rules, warning judges to avoid posts that may appear biased or compromise judicial integrity (Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct, 2023).

More state-specific guidance on the use of social media by judges can be found in this article from the Center for Judicial Ethics.

Common pitfalls for judges on social media

Judges can run into ethical trouble in ways they may not expect:

• Liking or following businesses or political figures may be seen as an endorsement
• Posting about charitable donations can be interpreted as soliciting contributions
• Writing online reviews, even anonymously, may be considered using judicial prestige improperly
• Sharing news articles or legal opinions can raise concerns about impartiality
• Commenting on controversial issues can create the appearance of bias, even if intended as a personal opinion

Recent cases highlight risks

Judicial conduct commissions have sanctioned judges for various social media missteps:

Promoting businesses

• A Kansas judge was disciplined for endorsing businesses in Facebook posts (Inquiry Concerning Martinez, Kansas Commission on Judicial Conduct, 2024).
• The Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline publicly reprimanded a judge for using Instagram and TikTok videos of himself presiding over court to promote his law practice (In the Matter of Vander Heyden, 2022).

Fundraising

• A California judge was admonished for sharing a charity donation link on Facebook (In the Matter Concerning Bertoli, California Commission on Judicial Performance, 2024).
• The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct publicly admonished a judge for organizing a school supply drive using court staff and advertising it on Facebook (Public Admonition of Metts, 2018).

Political endorsements

• A Minnesota judge was reprimanded for engaging with political content on social media, including liking a public figure's page and posting about a political event (In the Matter of Quinn, Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards, 2021).
• A New York judge was censured for endorsing a candidate for elective judicial office and a school board candidate on her Facebook page (In the Matter of Nunnery, New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct, 2023).

Best practices for judges

To stay in compliance, judges should:

1. Review social media policies

• Check their state's judicial code of conduct for guidance on online activity
• Stay updated on new rules regarding digital communication

2. Avoid lending prestige to a business, person, or cause

• Do not endorse law firms, businesses, or charities
• Be cautious when posting about personal activities that could be seen as promotional

3. Be cautious with political content

• Avoid commenting on or sharing politically charged posts
• Do not engage in online discussions that could imply bias

4. Manage privacy settings but recognize the risks

• Regularly review and adjust privacy settings to limit exposure
• Remember that even private posts can be shared publicly

5. Think before posting

• Consider how a post could be perceived by the public
• When in doubt, consult an ethics advisory committee before posting

Social media is a powerful tool, but judges must use it carefully. Every post, like, and comment leaves a digital footprint. By following these best practices, judges can protect the integrity of their office, uphold ethical standards, and maintain public confidence in the judiciary.