The State Bar Addresses Lawyers, Judges, and Social Media

The North Carolina State Bar recently adopted 2014 FEO 8, an ethics opinion concerning lawyers’ and judges’ use of social media. The opinion answers some questions, but raises others. Background. In recent years, a number of states have addressed whether and to what extent lawyers and judges may interact on social media. Florida doesn’t allow the two to be “friends” online at all, while other states generally do allow lawyers and judges to connect online, subject to various limitations. My colleague Michael Crowell wrote a paper summarizing the relevant rulings. North Carolina inquiry. The inquiry that resulted in 2014 FEO 8 asked, in essence, (1) whether a lawyer and a judge may “connect” on LinkedIn; (2) whether a lawyer may endorse or recommend a judge on the site; and (3) whether a judge may endorse or recommend a lawyer on the site (technically, whether a lawyer may accept an endorsement or a recommendation from a judge on the site). North Carolina ruling. In a nutshell, the bar ruled that lawyers and judges may connect; that lawyers may endorse or recommend judges; and that judges may not endorse or recommend lawyers, because such an endorsement or recommendation may “create the appearance of judicial partiality.” The opinion also states that lawyers and judges should be careful not to use social media to engage in ex parte communications, echoing a point made in a 2009 Judicial Standards Commission reprimand concerning a judge who communicated with a lawyer via Facebook about a pending case. Finally, [...]