The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct has issued a recommended censure for Darien Town Justice Jennifer R. Nunnery due to comments she made on Facebook between December 2020 to April 2021. These comments, which have been deemed inappropriate, landed her into a judicial ethics investigation.
Justice Nunnery’s comments were indicative of less than judicial decorum. One such instance involved a post where she compared her feelings of success during cross-examination to retail therapy, the language imbued with profanity and accompanying hashtags emphasizing empowerment. Other instances involved personal stories and comments made about local citizens, as well as endorsements of political candidates, which go against judicial rules.
In a public acknowledgment of her behavior, Nunnery told the New York Law Journal, “I failed to appreciate that being a Judge is a 24/7 position that calls for proper decorum at all times and in all settings. There are no exceptions.” Justice Nunnery also maintained that her adoption of her military persona from army service years was not intended to disrespect anyone, though she admitted that it was inappropriate.
She admitted that her actions were wrong and took “full responsibility.” She explained that she was undergoing significant personal stress due to problems in her marriage when the Facebook posts happened. She emphasized that she’s since focused on her faith along with her professional and personal responsibilities. She stated that as a judge, being respectful, fair, and neutral towards everyone is her priority.
The judge concluded her statement by saying, “I have learned a harsh lesson from this experience. My responsibilities as a judge require that I handle all of my affairs, both inside and outside the courtroom, in a manner that is respectful and responsible.”
Justice Nunnery now has 30 days to request a review of the official determination. In case she doesn’t, a formal reprimand will indeed be issued.
From this case, we are reminded once again of the line that professionals, and particularly those in such consequential roles as judges, must not cross when it comes to their public presence on social media. Of course, it is not only about what is legally and professionally appropriate but also about setting an example of respectable and responsible behavior.
This is a valuable case study for legal professionals and scholars, given the growing relevance of social media in the intersection of personal lives, professional behavior, and legal considerations. This particular incident serves as a reminder of the standards of behavior expected from legal professionals in the digital age, not just in the courtroom but on all platforms where they have a presence.
Find additional details on this incident here.