The API Report CardAPI Index
THE API REPORT CARD / Legal / Super Lawyers
Super Lawyers

Super Lawyers API

superlawyers.com

No public or partner API exists for Super Lawyers directory or profile data. The only integration surface is a copy-paste HTML badge embed, and attorneys cannot bulk-export their own profiles. The absence of an official feed has spawned a commercial scraping industry.

Last verified: July 2026Legal
API GRADE
F
VERIFIED JUL 2026

SCORECARD

ExistenceFAILNo API in any form; the closest integration surface is a copy-paste HTML badge embed hosted on their CDN.
AccessFAILAny data feed would take a bespoke commercial agreement with Thomson Reuters; nothing is offered to developers.
CoveragePOORAttorney profiles, selections, and reviews have no programmatic path; even profile owners get no export.
AuthFAILNo OAuth flow or API credentials exist; the badge embed is anonymous HTML with no parameters.
Docs & DXFAILNo developer portal, OpenAPI spec, SDKs, sandbox, or webhooks; scrapers fill the gap unofficially.
StabilityMIXED
Supergood: Super Lawyers isn't going to ship an API, so we did: stable endpoints, normalized JSON, managed auth.

Frequently asked questions

Super Lawyers scores F on the API Report Card. No public or partner API exists for Super Lawyers directory or profile data. The only integration surface is a copy-paste HTML badge embed, and attorneys cannot bulk-export their own profiles. The absence of an official feed has spawned a commercial scraping industry.

Tried to integrate with Super Lawyers?
SOURCES
No public REST or GraphQL API is offered for directory or profile data; partners cannot query attorneys, selections or practice areas programmatically superlawyers.com
No developer portal, OpenAPI/Swagger spec, SDKs, or sandbox environment exists for Super Lawyers superlawyers.com
No webhook system for selection updates, profile changes or new-list publication, partners cannot react to events superlawyers.com
Attorneys have no API or bulk export for their own profile content; updates are manual through the web UI superlawyers.com
The only 'integration' for firms is copy-paste HTML badge code from the profile page, no parameterization, no JSON, no auth superlawyers.com
Lack of an official data feed has driven a cottage industry of scrapers that violate the site's terms, creating brand-protection and data-quality risk webscrapingexpert.com
Thomson Reuters' broader legal API/developer ecosystem (Westlaw, Practical Law, HighQ, CoCounsel) does not surface Super Lawyers content, so even existing TR API customers cannot consume Super Lawyers data developers.thomsonreuters.com
No OAuth, no API keys, no rate-limit documentation, no SLA, there is nothing to certify against for enterprise partner builds superlawyers.com
Selection-process credibility is contested: critics argue the rating is heavily marketing-driven and that the 'top 5%' framing is misleading uslegalmarketing.com
Attorneys are not required to pay to be selected, but premium profile pricing (cited at ~$174/month for a single profile) is seen as steep relative to the marketing lift comradeweb.com
Free / basic directory listings are widely criticized as 'a dismal resource' lacking photos, contact info and reviews compared to paid tiers topconsumerreviews.com
Whether Super Lawyers selection actually drives clients is contested, many firms report ambiguous or negative ROI on the paid profiles and plaques onthemap.com
State bar associations (notably New Jersey historically) have at times restricted attorneys from advertising 'Super Lawyer' designations as misleading avvo.com
Out-firm vs in-firm nomination weighting and the role of paid plaques/reprints create a perception of pay-to-play among the bar roseninstitute.com
Attorneys complain about aggressive cross-sell of plaques, reprints, video profiles and magazine ads after selection roseninstitute.com
Profile data quality drifts because updates depend on attorneys claiming and maintaining their profiles goconstellation.com