Jury selection has always been a pivotal phase in any trial. But social media research has really changed the game.
Traditionally, voir dire (questioning potential jurors) and personal observation guided attorneys in identifying potential biases and determining whether a juror could be fair and impartial. While these are still foundational processes, today, legal teams have an incredibly powerful tool at their disposal to get unprecedented insight into potential jurors' lives: social media research.
Publicly available social media profiles provide a broader, often more candid view of a potential juror’s values, interests, affiliations, and attitudes. With billions of users across platforms like Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter), litigators have access to a seemingly infinite stream of relevant information.
What was once limited to in-person questioning and written responses is now supplemented by digital insights that can help attorneys make more informed, strategic decisions—before a single question is asked in court.
Social Media as a Strategic Asset in Jury Selection
These days you'd be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't have a significant digital footprint. People are sharing more of themselves online every day, which is good news for attorneys: public posts, comments, shared articles, liked pages, and group affiliations can offer critical insights into a person’s beliefs, preferences, and potential biases. For litigators, this information can be just as, if not more valuable as anything disclosed during voir dire.
Social media research allows attorneys to:
-
Identify attitudes that may not be apparent in courtroom responses
-
Cross-check answers provided in juror questionnaires
-
Uncover past legal involvement or strong opinions on certain issues
-
Detect signs of bias or predisposition toward one side of a case
While a juror may appear neutral in court, their online presence might reveal strong opinions on corporate responsibility, medical science, civil rights, or other topics directly relevant to the case at hand. Identifying these factors early in the selection process can significantly influence trial strategy and outcomes.
The Ethics of Jury Selection Social Media Research
But is researching potential jurors on social media legal?
Yes, provided it’s done ethically and in accordance with professional conduct rules.
In Formal Opinion 466, the American Bar Association clarified that attorneys may review a potential juror’s publicly available social media content as part of the jury selection process. The opinion draws a firm line, however, between passive observation and direct contact.
What’s permitted:
-
Viewing publicly accessible profiles and posts
-
Reviewing content that appears in search engine results
-
Saving or documenting posts that may be relevant
What’s prohibited:
-
Sending friend requests or connection requests
-
Messaging or following jurors from personal or firm accounts
-
Accessing private profiles or restricted content
Even if a platform notifies a juror that someone viewed their profile, this is not considered unethical, as long as no direct contact is initiated by the attorney or legal team. In making that determination, the opinion likened reviewing a juror’s publicly displayed material to driving down a juror’s street to get a sense of his or her environment, which would not ethically be considered improper.
However, the opinion did note that asking a juror for access to his or her social media, by“friending” them on Facebook for example, would improper and likened to stopping the car and asking to look inside the juror’s home.
All this being said, local court rules and jurisdiction-specific guidance may impose further limitations, so due diligence is essential.
Case Studies: How Social Media Insights Shape Jury Selection
The value of social media research becomes clearest when applied in real trial settings. Here are two examples where online activity played a decisive role in selecting or striking potential jurors.
Example 1: Scientific Bias Detection in a Toxic Tort Trial
In a toxic tort case involving complex medical evidence, a trial team used real-time social media review during voir dire. One potential juror, through publicly available Facebook posts, regularly shared health science articles and participated in online discussions focused on scientific literacy. The team viewed this as a favorable indicator for a defense built on expert testimony.
In contrast, another juror had reposted content highly critical of pharmaceutical companies and corporate conduct, prompting the team to use a peremptory strike. Both decisions were informed by social media content that would not have emerged through voir dire alone.
Example 2: Uncovering a Misrepresentation in a Personal Injury Trial
In another case, a potential juror indicated on a written questionnaire that he had never been involved in a lawsuit. However, his social media history revealed references to a previous personal injury claim he had filed. This discrepancy prompted the trial team to verify the information in court records. Upon confirmation, the juror was removed for cause.
These examples illustrate how online research can uncover inconsistencies and strengthen the basis for strikes, helping attorneys build a more reliable and strategically advantageous jury.
The Importance of Preserving Social Media Evidence
While social media research offers valuable insight, its full potential depends on the ability to preserve what you find before it disappears.
Social media content is dynamic and ephemeral by nature. Posts are frequently edited, deleted, or hidden. Privacy settings are changed, accounts are deleted or blocked. A juror’s online comment that appears at 9 a.m. might be gone by noon—along with any chance of verifying or presenting it as evidence.
For litigators conducting online juror research, this poses a significant challenge: what you see today may not be available tomorrow.
Capturing and preserving this content in real time is essential to ensure information can be referenced, shared, or potentially introduced into court proceedings.
Key Features to Look for in a Social Media Evidence Preservation Tool
To make social media research during jury selection reliable and legally defensible, attorneys should rely on tools that:
-
Enable immediate, browser-based capture of web and social media content so they can preserve the evidence before it disappears.
-
Generate forensically sound evidence, that includes full metadata, timestamps, and native context.
-
Create a verifiable digital hash (e.g., SHA256) to confirm the integrity of preserved content and prove it was not altere
-
Produce exportable formats that are suitable for legal proceedings
Using social media evidence preservation tools helps ensure that evidence is collected ethically, preserved correctly, and ready for scrutiny—whether during voir dire or at trial.
Best Practices for Social Media Research in Jury Selection
Effectively integrating social media into jury selection requires a structured, ethical, and legally sound process. Below are key best practices to guide trial teams:
1. Begin Research Early and Stay Organized
Start as soon as you receive a juror list. The earlier your team initiates research, the more time you have to validate identities, analyze content, and integrate findings into voir dire strategy. Use shared spreadsheets, case management software, or jury research databases to track findings efficiently.
Pro tip: Create juror profiles that include links to key posts, summary observations, and strike recommendations for rapid reference in court.
2. Limit Research to Publicly Available Content
Respecting ethical boundaries is critical. Attorneys and staff should only access content that is publicly viewable. Avoid any action that could be seen as direct interaction—such as sending friend requests, following accounts, or messaging.
Even inadvertent access to restricted information can result in ethical violations or court sanctions.
3. Validate Identity Before Drawing Conclusions
Not every social media profile with a matching name belongs to your potential juror. Before relying on any information, confirm the account belongs to the correct individual by cross-referencing photos, location data, employment history, or mutual connections.
Mistaken identity can lead to flawed decisions and ethical complications.
4. Preserve Evidence Promptly
Social media posts are often edited or deleted shortly after being published. If a post is relevant to a juror’s eligibility or credibility, it should be captured and stored immediately using tools or methods that generate metadata and timestamps.
Proper preservation not only supports internal decision-making but can also become critical if the content is later challenged or used in court.
5. Use Findings Strategically in Voir Dire
The goal of social media research is not to profile jurors indiscriminately but to uncover information that can help determine whether a juror is capable of impartiality. Use insights to:
-
Tailor voir dire questions to probe specific attitudes
-
Assess the consistency of questionnaire responses
-
Identify potential grounds for strikes for cause
-
Guide peremptory strikes in borderline situations
6. Maintain Documentation for Accountability
If social media findings lead to a strike or inform a legal argument, you should be prepared to demonstrate how the information was obtained. Maintaining a research log that includes URLs, screenshots, timestamps, and the names of team members who performed the search can establish credibility and transparency.
7. Stay Informed About Evolving Legal Standards
The legal and ethical landscape around juror research is evolving, especially as courts respond to the influence of social media on public opinion and juror conduct. Regularly review ABA opinions, state bar guidance, and case law to ensure compliance with current best practices.
As the role of social media in everyday life continues to grow, so too does its relevance in the courtroom—especially during jury selection. By supplementing traditional voir dire with targeted social media research, attorneys gain deeper insight into prospective jurors’ beliefs, behaviors, and potential biases.
Additional Resources
Are you conducting social media research or collecting evidence online? Check out these additional investigation resources:
- Facebook Investigation Guide
- X / Twitter Investigation Guide
-
SOCMINT: Tools, Tips, & Tricks for Social Media Investigations
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Is it ethical to review jurors’ social media accounts during jury selection?
Yes, as long as the review is passive and limited to public content. Attorneys must not send friend requests, follow, or message potential jurors.
Q: What types of information are most useful in social media profiles?
Posts or affiliations that reveal political views, prior legal experience, strong opinions about justice-related issues, or personal history relevant to the case.
Q: What should I do if I find something important online, but the post is later deleted?
If not properly preserved, the content may be inadmissible or challenged in court. Real-time capture with forensic tools is strongly recommended.
Q: Can social media findings be used to strike a juror for cause?
Yes. If the content reveals undisclosed legal history or strong bias, it may justify a cause challenge.
Q: Are there risks in relying on social media research?
Yes—misidentifying profiles, overinterpreting context, or violating ethical boundaries can backfire. It should be one tool among many in a comprehensive jury selection strategy.
Q: What's the best evidence capture tool for jury selection and social media research?
WebPreserver is a digital preservation tool designed specifically for legal and investigative professionals. It enables users to capture, preserve, and authenticate online content in real time.
WebPreserver features:
-
Automated, 2 click content capture across any website or social media platforms
-
SHA256 hash verification to confirm integrity of captured data
-
Full HTML source code and metadata capture
-
Exportable, court-admissible file formats for use in litigation
-
Browser-based plug-in for fast, intuitive operation
Whether used during voir dire or in pre-trial preparation, WebPreserver helps attorneys preserve key online content in a manner that meets evidentiary standards. It reduces reliance on screenshots or affidavits, replacing them with verifiable digital records that can stand up under scrutiny.
By integrating tools like WebPreserver into your jury selection process, you can ensure that social media research is not only insightful—but also defensible.
