Students Beware: Law Schools Scrutinizing Applicants' Social Media Posts
More than half of law school admissions officials check on the social media pages of applicants, and what they find can lead straight to the rejection pile.
October 03, 2018 at 05:59 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
While events in question took place long before Facebook and Instagram existed, it is clear from former Yale Law School student Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings that looking into a prospective lawyer or judge's high-school career is now the norm, evidenced by scrutiny of the nominee's calendar entries and personal writings. In the age of social media, the availability of such information has only proliferated and become more of a potential liability for future law students.
If you want to get into law school, it may be better not post that video of your underage self shot-gunning a beer to your Facebook page. And while you're at it, leave your obsession with actual shot guns off your Twitter account.
It turns out that more than half of law school admissions officials recently surveyed by Kaplan Test Prep—56 percent—said they have looked at the applicants' social media to get a better sense of them. And fully 91 percent said that social media is fair game when culling through applications.
Law schools appear to monitor social media more closely than do business schools. Just 40 percent of admissions officers at business schools told Kaplan they look at applicants' digital trails, and only 71 percent reported such activity as appropriate, rather than an invasion of privacy.
The highly regulated nature of the legal profession explains why law schools are more careful about who they allow in the door, according to Jeff Thomas, executive director of pre-law programs at Kaplan. New attorneys must pass character and fitness examines before they are admitted to the bar, and they can be stripped of their law license for engaging in unethical behavior.
“An overarching theme to the entire law school application is whether a prospective student is able to exercise good judgment. An applicant's digital trail can be an indicator of whether or not he or she possesses this quality,” Thomas said. “The legal community takes ethics among its members seriously.”
Law admissions offices have more heavily relied on social media reviews in recent years. Just 37 percent said they looked at social media pages in 2011, when Kaplan first asked the question.
Of those who check social media pages, 66 percent told Kaplan that they had found something that hurt a candidate's chances, such as inappropriate photos of underage drinking or other undesirable activities. Some officials reported seeing racist things on social media, or even criminal activity.
“A student who had a lot of character and fitness issues involving drugs and alcohol in their past claimed that they were now living sober, but their Facebook page was full of them partying,” according to one survey comment.
“A student was admitted but had a fascination with guns so we had to discuss this with him,” reads other comment.
Social media isn't always a hindrance to getting into law school, however. Among the admissions officials who look there, 29 percent said they found something that helped an applicant, namely community service activities they didn't initially mention.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
Government Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readTrump Mulls Big Changes to Banking Regulation, Unsettling the Industry
Trending Stories
- 1Revisiting the Boundaries Between Proper and Improper Argument: 10 Years Later
- 2Hochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
- 3Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
- 4Biden commutes sentences for 37 of 40 federal death row inmates, including two convicted of California murders
- 5Avoiding Franchisor Failures: Be Cautious and Do Your Research
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250