The Oklahoma Bar Journal August 2023

these restrictions would apply to “friends” on Facebook, “follow ers” on Instagram and Twitter, as well as any other connections on various social media platforms. The panel opined that a social media account of a judge can only include “‘friends’ ... who do[ ] not regularly appear in the Judge’s court.” 6 This would exclude any “law enforcement officers, social workers, attorneys and others who may appear in his or her court” from this “friends” list. 7 The panel cited similar judi cial ethics opinions reached in other states, including New York, Florida, South Carolina, Kentucky and Ohio, that found an inherent conflict between a judge’s use of social media and their judicial duties. The panel’s reasoning for its strict limitation is based on the belief that judges should have minimal interaction with social media to avoid an appearance of impropriety. The panel, referring to the preamble of the Oklahoma Code of Judicial Conduct, stated that judges have a duty to “main tain the dignity of judicial office at all times, avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in their professional and personal lives, and to ensure the greatest

Stanisic Vladimir - stock.adobe.com

Statements or opinions expressed in the Oklahoma Bar Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff.

AUGUST 2023 | 23

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL