Texas lawyer advertising on websites and social media

What to take away

Texas advertising rules for public communications

Texas governs lawyer marketing through the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, adopted by the Supreme Court of Texas and enforced by the State Bar. Rules 7.01 to 7.07 cover firm names, advertising, solicitation, filing, and related definitions. Taken together, they decide what a Texas firm may publish and what it must send to the State Bar. The publication's California bar advertising rules discussion addresses a separate jurisdiction.

Rule 7.01 covers firm and trade names. A firm may not use a name that is false or misleading, and a trade name may not imply a connection to a government agency or a public office. A solo practitioner who markets under a trade name must register it with the State Bar.

Rule 7.02 governs advertising generally. A communication about a lawyer's services is false or misleading if it contains a material misrepresentation, omits a fact needed to keep the statement from misleading, or creates an unjustified expectation about results. That last clause is where most website claims fail.

Rule 7.03 addresses solicitation and barratry. It bars in-person and live telephone contact with a prospective client for profit when the contact has no family, prior, or professional motive, and it restricts communications with people who have already asked the firm not to contact them.

Rule 7.04 covers filing and the written review process. It is the rule that creates the Advertising Review Committee's role and sets the general duty to file advertisements with the State Bar.

Rule 7.05 addresses filing exemptions and recordkeeping. It also sets the retention period: a copy or recording of each filed advertisement must be kept for two years after the date of its last publication, which matters when a grievance arrives years after a campaign ran.

Rule 7.06 sets the filing fee and the consequences of failing to file, and a failure to file is its own violation even when the advertisement is accurate. It is short and it is the rule most often cited against firms that assumed a website was exempt.

Rule 7.07 supplies definitions used throughout the chapter, including the terms “advertisement” and “solicitation.” Those definitions matter when deciding how the other rules apply, so firms should consult the rule when classifying a communication.

If you are auditing a site against these rules for the first time, start with the questions that come up in every review of lawyer advertising and work outward to the specific rules.

How the rules interact with federal law

State bar rules set the floor for lawyer conduct, and the Federal Trade Commission sets a separate floor for the truth of commercial claims. A statement can satisfy the Texas Disciplinary Rules and still draw FTC attention if it is not substantiated.

A firm that keeps one evidence file for every claim answers both reviews at once. Federal law does not replace the Texas filing duty, and a Texas filing does not settle the FTC question.

Rule 7.02 bars a claim the firm cannot verify. The FTC asks the same question in different words: can the firm prove the claim, and does the advertisement show what a typical client should expect?

The FTC's 2024 proposal on AI impersonation concerns a separate federal issue; it is not a guide to truth in advertising or a substitute for Texas advertising review.

What the Advertising Review Committee files and reviews

The Advertising Review Committee is a standing committee of the State Bar of Texas. It reviews advertisements submitted by lawyers and firms and issues opinions on whether a submission complies with the disciplinary rules. Filing is not a permission slip, but it is the mechanism the State Bar uses to see marketing before the public does.

The Committee reviews the substance of the advertisement, not the design. Reviewers look for unverifiable claims, comparisons that cannot be supported, guarantees of results, misleading specialization language, and missing disclosures. A board certification claim, for example, must name the certifying body.

Submissions arrive through the State Bar's online advertising review system. A firm uploads the advertisement, pays the fee, and receives a response. The Committee may approve, approve with required changes, or decline. A decline is not a disciplinary action, but an unfiled advertisement that later draws a grievance is.

The filing process covers websites, videos, print, radio, and television, along with direct mail and social media advertising. The Committee's published guidance treats a firm's website as a single advertisement, which is why the filing covers the site as a whole rather than each page.

Fees vary by medium and by the size of the submission. A firm filing a single website pays less than a firm filing a broadcast campaign, because the schedule is priced per advertisement and by medium.

The State Bar publishes the current fee schedule on its advertising review page, and the fee is due with the submission rather than after review. Pull that schedule before you budget a filing or set a deadline, since the amounts and the filing windows stated there are the ones the Committee applies.

What the Committee does not do is approve your marketing strategy. It does not rank your website, review your search placements, or comment on your social calendar. Its job is narrow: does this communication comply with Rules 7.01 to 7.07.

A firm that treats the filing as a formality wastes the review. The useful move is to submit early enough that a decline still leaves time to change the advertisement before it runs. That is the same discipline behind law firm website marketing, where proof is assembled before the claim is published.

Filing deadlines that catch website and social media posts

Deadlines in Texas advertising review are tied to when the advertisement first appears, not to a calendar quarter. The general rule is that a required advertisement must be filed no later than 30 days after it is first published, and a firm may file before publication instead.

Waiting for a monthly or annual batch is the most common filing mistake.

A website is the medium that surprises firms most. The site is filed as a single advertisement, and the filing clock starts when the site goes live; under the general rule above, filing is due no later than 30 days after first publication. A firm that redesigns a site and publishes it without filing must still file within that general window, even if the old site had been on file.

Social posts are treated differently because they are published continuously. A post that is advertising must be filed at or before the time it goes out. A firm that posts daily cannot file daily, so the practical answer is to file the templates and recurring formats once and keep one-off promotional posts inside those templates.

Keep a dated log of every filing and every publication. When a grievance arrives, the log is the difference between a documented compliance program and an assertion that the firm meant well. A separate California complaint discussion is not a substitute for Texas requirements.

Social media posts: when a post becomes a filing obligation

Not every post is advertising. A firm that shares a courthouse closure notice, a holiday greeting, or a link to a general news story is not advertising legal services. A post becomes a filing obligation when it promotes the firm's services, states or implies a fee, or makes a claim about results, speed, or expertise.

Four triggers matter most. First, the post names a practice area and invites contact. Second, the post states a fee, a range, or a no-fee guarantee. Third, the post makes a comparative or superlative claim, such as best, top, or leading. Fourth, the post includes a client testimonial or an endorsement.

Testimonials are the trigger firms miss. A short quote from a former client, a screenshot of a five-star review, or a video endorsement is advertising when the firm publishes it.

The FTC's answers on the endorsement guides explain why disclosure and typicality matter, and Texas reviewers apply the same logic when they review a submitted post.

Paid social advertising is always a filing obligation. A promoted post, a sponsored carousel, or a lead form ad is advertising by any definition, and the filing must happen before the campaign starts. Organic posts sit closer to the line, which is why a written standard beats a judgment call made at 5 p.m. on a Friday.

Attorney personal accounts are a gray area that firms handle badly. When a lawyer posts about the firm, uses the firm's branding, or links to the firm's intake page, the post is firm advertising even if it appears on a personal profile. A law firm social media program that sets this boundary in writing saves arguments later.

One practical test: if the post would be useful to a prospective client choosing a lawyer, treat it as advertising and file it. That test over-files slightly, and over-filing is cheaper than a grievance.

When a single post is unclear, run it through the question of which common law firm marketing strategy questions need clearing before it goes out.

Direct messages and direct outreach under Rule 7.03

A direct message is a one-to-one communication with a person the firm picked out. Rule 7.03 bars solicitation of a prospective client for profit through in-person and live telephone contact. A DM sent to a stranger to win paid work falls inside that bar.

The exceptions are narrow. A lawyer, a family member, or a person with whom the firm already had a professional relationship can be contacted. A DM that answers someone who asked the firm for help is a different act from a DM that starts the conversation.

Keep those two apart in your workflow, because a coordinator who copies a template will not see the difference unaided. Do not contact anyone who has told the firm to stop, and treat that instruction as binding on every account at the firm.

Platforms restrict unsolicited messages as well, and a restricted account is a marketing loss before it is a disciplinary one.

Comments and engagement

A firm is responsible for the advertising it publishes, and a comment section the firm controls can become part of the advertisement. A firm that leaves a client's result claim in its own comments has published that claim. Moderate comments on promotional posts, and remove claims the firm cannot substantiate.

Website copy changes and the refiling question

The refiling question is simpler than most firms make it. Ask whether the change alters what a prospective client is told about the firm's services, results, fees, or credentials. If it does, refile. If it is a spelling fix, a new photo of the same attorney, or a formatting change, it does not.

Changes that trigger refiling include new practice area descriptions, new results or case summaries, new fee language, new attorney credentials, new testimonials, and new comparative claims. Adding an attorney who brings a board certification is a refiling event because the certification claim is new advertising content.

Changes that do not trigger refiling include correcting a typo, updating a phone number, swapping a headshot for a newer headshot of the same person, and adjusting page layout. A firm should still log these changes so the filing record stays current.

The hard case is a content refresh that rewrites existing pages without adding new claims. Reviewers take in the advertisement as a whole, so a rewrite that changes the impression of the firm is a refiling event even when no single sentence is new. The conservative call is to refile the site after any substantial rewrite.

Refiling carries a fee, which is why firms batch changes. Batch on a schedule, not on a whim. A quarterly content review that collects every pending change into one refiling is cheaper and easier to document than a refiling every time a marketer edits a paragraph.

Keep the filed version and the live version aligned. A firm that files one version of a page and publishes another has an unfiled advertisement even though it paid a fee. Version control is a compliance control, not a marketing preference.

Penalties for unfiled or non-compliant advertising

Penalties begin with the grievance process. A complaint about advertising goes to the State Bar's Chief Disciplinary Counsel, which investigates and may dismiss, issue a private reprimand, or bring the matter to a district grievance committee. Sanctions range from a private reprimand to a public reprimand, probation, suspension, and disbarment.

Failing to file is itself a rule violation under Rule 7.06, separate from any problem with the content of the advertisement. A firm can have a perfectly truthful website and still be sanctioned for not filing it. That is the penalty most firms do not see coming.

Unsubstantiated claims are the second common exposure. A claim that a firm wins most cases, recovers the largest verdicts, or gets faster results must be supportable. The FTC's small business advertising guidance explains the substantiation expectation, and Texas reviewers apply the same standard to claims in a filing.

Aggravating factors raise the sanction. Prior discipline, a pattern of unfiled advertising, a claim aimed at vulnerable clients, and a failure to correct after notice all push the outcome toward a public sanction. Mitigating factors include a prompt correction, a documented compliance program, and a clean disciplinary record.

Beyond the State Bar, a misleading advertisement can draw a competitor's complaint, a consumer protection action, or a private suit. Legal malpractice insurers also ask about marketing compliance on applications, and an unfiled advertisement is an uncomfortable answer.

Content planning is part of law firm content marketing, but it does not replace the Texas advertising review and filing duties described here.

A filing workflow for firms posting across multiple channels

One workflow, run on a schedule, keeps website and social advertising in order. The steps below assume a firm with a website, a blog, two or three social profiles, and occasional video.

Run the workflow with a checklist so the decision does not depend on who is in the room.

Assign one owner. A filing workflow with three owners has no owner, and the failure mode is always the same: a post goes out, nobody filed it, and the firm learns about it from a letter. One person, one calendar, one log.

Train the people who post. A paralegal or marketing coordinator who writes social copy needs to know the four triggers and the escalation path. Ten minutes of training prevents the most common violation, which is an unremarkable promotional post that nobody thought of as advertising.

Review the log annually against the live website. Pages get added by vendors, landing pages get spun up for campaigns, and microsites get forgotten. An annual sweep catches the advertisements that entered the site without passing through the workflow.

Common questions