Reuters is reporting that a New York ethics panel has ruled that a judge's "friend"ing of the parents of victims of a criminal case before the judge is not necessarily sufficient to warrant recusal.  

 

The Reuters piece notes that NY is one of at least nine states in which ethics panels have offered guidance on judges' use of social media.  It also notes that, generally, while finding that a judge's joining of a social network site is not inherently unethical, judges should "tread carefully and disclose connections on a case-by-case basis."

 

The committee also reiterated in its report that recusal was up to the judge's discretion.  The article quotes Stephen Gillers, New York University Law School's esteemed professor and expert in the area of professional responsibility who makes the point that the code of judicial conduct in New York and other states requires judges to take steps to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.  Gillers is quoted as saying there is "no reason why being a 'friend' on Facebook, LinkedIn, or any other site should change the rules that have worked so well in...the physical world."

 

This represents yet another chapter in the never-ending book to be written on the incongruous relationship between technology and law.

 

You can read the article in its entirety here.