Social media checks for law students, bar applicants and lawyers

By Dave Fradette · Published October 20, 2026

Short answer: Bar examiners, firms and appointing officials can read what you've posted, though a 2025 Bar Examiner article notes few applicants have been denied admission over social media. Lawyers also face confidentiality duties online, and discipline has followed offensive public posts. Review your history before you apply, are nominated, or file.

Bar admission: how much does social media matter?

Bar applicants go through character and fitness review. In a Summer 2025 Bar Examiner article, Dean Erwin Chemerinsky wrote that applicants' speech on social media "might be very relevant" to those evaluations, and also that "there are not yet many cases where individuals were denied admission to the bar based on their speech over social media" (source 1). That is a scholarly article, not an NCBE rule. A 2009 Florida Bar News story described Florida's board of bar examiners looking at some applicants' Facebook pages during character and fitness investigations, aimed at applicants who admit past indiscretions or need rehabilitation (source 2). Treat that as a dated example, not a description of current practice. The same article reviews cases where applications were denied or discipline followed, and the decisions it describes rested mainly on nondisclosure, dishonesty or conduct, not on speech alone (source 1). For an applicant, what you leave out or misstate on the application can matter more than what you posted. Check your own jurisdiction's application.

Once you are a lawyer

Confidentiality follows you online. ABA Formal Opinion 480 (2018) says lawyers who blog or engage in other public commentary may not reveal information relating to a representation, even when the information is already public (source 3).
Judges. ABA Formal Opinion 462 (2013) says a judge may take part in electronic social networking but must avoid conduct that would undermine the judge's independence, integrity or impartiality (source 4).
Discipline. ABA Litigation News reported that the Supreme Court of South Carolina suspended a lawyer for six months over June 2020 Facebook posts, including profane posts mocking groups of people and derogatory remarks about George Floyd's death. His public page identified him as a lawyer. The court also required diversity training and mental health assessments (source 5).

Judicial nominees and appointments

In March 2019, Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly withdrew a district judge's nomination to the Court of Appeals after his 2017 tweets surfaced. The tweets criticized the president, called for gun regulation and included profanity aimed at elected officials. She said a judge must be seen as unbiased and impartial, and that the nominating committee would search candidates' social media accounts (source 6). Political content is the pattern here: whichever direction it leans, reviewers of judicial candidates read it for perceived impartiality.

Background-check companies

In 2012 the FTC announced an $800,000 settlement with Spokeo to resolve Fair Credit Reporting Act charges. The FTC had alleged Spokeo marketed its compiled consumer profiles to human resources, background screening and recruiting companies. Spokeo denied several allegations; this was a settlement (source 7). See your rights in a social media background check.

What PruneSocial covers, and what to check yourself

PruneSocial scores supported text from your own account exports (posts, comments, likes and more) against published screening categories. Political, news-event and workplace commentary is listed separately as reputation flags. Add these by hand:

Client and case references. Search your history for anything that could reveal information about a client or matter, public or not (Opinion 480).
Your law-firm or court affiliation in bios, and whether your public pages identify you as a lawyer.
Political content and likes, especially if you may seek a judicial role.
Photos and videos, which PruneSocial doesn't read, and private messages, which aren't in exports.

Found later: real cases in this field

Published news cases where old or overlooked posts cost someone the role. Names left out on purpose.

District judge nominated to the appeals court, Kansas · 2019
Post or commentLaw
What surfaced
Tweets insulting the president and elected officials, with profanity
How old it was
About 2 years
How it came out
Surfaced after the nomination; vetting had missed them
Outcome
Nomination withdrawn
Source: KMUW
Town judge, Altona, NY · 2019
Meme or imageLawCheck by hand
What surfaced
A noose image with a political caption; the judicial commission cited its racial connotations
How old it was
Under 1 year
How it came out
Judicial conduct commission inquiry
Outcome
Resigned and agreed never to serve as a judge again
Source: Blavity, Yahoo News
Assistant district attorney, Knox County, TN · 2025
Post or commentLaw
What surfaced
Posts and reposts on X that the paper called racist and sexist, including praise of Nazis
How it came out
A local news outlet asked the prosecutor's office about the posts
Outcome
Fired; his cases were reviewed
Source: ABA Journal

See more cases on Found later

See what your own history looks like

PruneSocial scores supported text activity from your own account exports against publicly documented screening categories and gives you one specific cleanup action for anything flagged. It also lists political, news-event and workplace commentary separately as reputation flags. Try a free 50-item preview first.

Start a free preview