What is the conventional wisdom concerning whether or not judges can and should use social networking sites for their personal and professional purposes?

Question

What will be an ideal response

Answer 1

Given this widespread sense of isolation, it is probably not unusual for judges to consider using social networks for both their personal and professional lives; in fact, more than one-third of state court judges and magistrates responding to a survey said they have used social media in either their personal or professional lives. While judges generally are free to join Internet social networks, they should ensure that such activities do not otherwise violate any code of ethics. For example, before joining an Internet social network, a judge should consider whether participating in the network could lead to judicial disqualification in matters pending in his or her court. Another consideration is whether using social networks gives the appearance of jeopardizing the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality. For example, joining a group promoting the legalization of marijuana and other such sites could be fraught with controversy. Even when joining a general network group, the judge should be mindful of the public aspect of these networks and adjust his/her postings accordingly, so as to not project an unethical image. Likewise, for an attorney or someone else appearing in the judge's court, being connected to the judge through networks like Facebook or MySpace could lead to problems. At a minimum, a judge should remove the attorney or party as a "friend" from his Facebook or MySpace list until the case is over. In sum, judges can become involved with Internet social networking, but they need to take certain precautions in doing so. As a judicial ethics advisory commission in New York observed in 2009, judges should "employ an appropriate level of prudence, discretion and decorum in how they make use of this technology."