Justice Eva Guzman on Why Judges Using Social Media Can Be a Good Thing
"I think [social media] helps the public and the bar to understand or at least know who the justices are; most people don't even know who we are."
October 11, 2019 at 04:16 PM
5 minute read
Due to the many legal and ethical ramifications of their profession, judges must exercise more responsibility than most other professions when using new technology. Social media, which is ubiquitous nowadays, presents a whole host of snares and pitfalls for members of the judiciary.
For instance, if they insert themselves into the minutia of people's day to day affairs by sharing photos from a beach, "liking" a "Distracted Boyfriend" meme, or commenting on current events, judges open the door to allowing family, friends and even total strangers into their lives through the Internet. Although these mundane social media actions have almost no negative consequences for most people as long as they remain polite and civil, they can have unintended consequences for judges. For instance, based upon what a judge posts, the result can be misrepresentation, misinterpretation, cyberbullying and even threats to privacy and safety.
Despite the obvious pitfalls, Texas Supreme Court Justice Eva Guzman is a proponent of the use of social media by the judiciary, and believes the proper use of social media by judges can enhance the public's understanding of and confidence in the court system.
This week, Guzman spoke with Texas Lawyer about how judges can post responsibly and effectively.
How did you come to be interested in this topic?
I got on Twitter in 2009 when I was appointed to the court and I thought I needed an online presence. So my initial thoughts about being a judge on Twitter was it would be a good way to get out my campaign message to my constituency. Initially that was my motivation and I was mostly encouraged by the campaign folks to do it, but I have since evolved in how I view social media and judges.
How do you think social media can enhance the understanding of the judiciary by the public?
I think an issue for judiciaries across the board in our judicial system is the public's confidence in the system. One way judges use social media effectively is to communicate with the public about what we do and how we go about doing our work. Sometimes I tweet about why a case is important to engage with law school students. Sometimes it's a tweet about a bringing exhibits into a courtroom or because it helps facilitate the argument. So there are a number of factors a judge cares about, but I think [social media] helps the public and the bar to understand or at least know who the justices are; most people don't even know who we are.
What is the worst thing a judge can do on social media and how likely is something like that to happen?
I think there are a lot of dangers for judges who don't approach social media like they approach every interaction with the bar and the public. You have to think about the code of ethics and then you have self-imposed restraints toward decorum and showing respect for the process. I don't tweet about politics, I avoid it. I also try not to "like" anything that is objectively or subjectively overly political. I think these days you can really get into trouble, so you have to be careful, because the citizens coming to your courtroom need to see you as impartial and not as overtly political, otherwise I don't think they're going to come into your courtroom thinking they're going to get a fair shot if they perceive the judge to be overly political. I don't think any judge should get on social media without reviewing the code of ethics and understanding from the outset what those parameters are going to be and how they're going to exercise restraint.
Would an ombudsmen be more helpful to respond to unfair comments and criticism than judge personally meeting the complaints?
Sometimes judges are unfairly criticized and we can't respond and should not respond. So in the past, I have seen different lawyers on their own respond to criticism here and there, but there is no formal system for that and I'm not sure we'd want it anyway. It just goes with the job, and if you can't face the criticism then you probably ought to find another line of work because one side is always not going to necessarily be happy. I personally don't think an ombudsman is necessary and the criticism just goes with the territory.
How many of your colleagues on the bench are active on social media?
Justice Debra Lehermann has a Twitter account and is on Facebook; Justice Jeffrey S. Boyd is on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram; Justice Jane Bland has a Facebook account, I don't know if she's on Instagram; Justice Paul W. Green has a Twitter and Facebook account, but I don't know if he ever uses it; Justice Brett Busby is very active on social media right now; Chief Justice Nathan L. Hecht has Twitter account but I don't think I've ever seen him tweet, but he's got it so maybe he does every now and then.
|Read More
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 AllVinson & Elkins' Veteran Pro Bono Counsel on How Needs Could Change After the Election
7 minute readCampaign for Judge: 2 San Antonio Justices Compete for Same Seat in Election
7 minute readHarris County Vote 2024: Mediator Bruce Bain Challenges Judge Ursula Hall
4 minute readHarris County Justice Meg Poissant Is in Election Race With GOP's Brad Hart
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Section 1782 Practice Pointers From Recent Decisions
- 2Democratic State AGs Revel in Role as Last Line of Defense Against Trump Agenda
- 3Decision of the Day: Split Circuit Panel Bars Enforcement of Ivory Law's 'Display Restriction' on Antique Group Members
- 4Chiesa Shahinian Bolsters Corporate Practice With 5 From Newark Boutique
- 52 Years After Paul Plevin Merger, Quarles & Brady’s Revenue Up More than 13%
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