Legal Ethics
Auto Clubs and the Lost Origins of the Access-to-Justice Crisis
A century ago, auto clubs offered an astonishing array of legal services, representing members in civil and criminal cases, on both sides of the proverbial “v.” But in the 1930s, bar associations decimated these clubs, alongside other group-legal-service providers—and, we argue, sowed the seeds of the current access-to-justice crisis.
Judging Debt: How Judges’ Practices in Consumer-Credit Court Undermine Procedural Justice
This Essay draws from on-the-ground interviews and procedural-justice theory to analyze judging practices in debt-collection courts. Current practices undermine courts’ fairness and legitimacy. This Essay argues that courts must prioritize procedural justice by adopting judging practices that consider unrepresented litigants’ circumstances and require a more active judicial role.
The Weaponization of Attorney’s Fees in an Age of Constitutional Warfare
States are using the threat of catastrophic, one-sided fee awards to evade judicial review in controversial areas like abortion and gun control. Litigants challenging such laws—and their attorneys—face liability for the opposing party’s legal fees, while the state and its ideological allies bear no such risk.
Dereliction of Duty: State-Bar Inaction in Response to America’s Access-to-Justice Crisis
Ralph Baxter explains how state bars can alleviate America’s access-to-justice crisis by opening up the justice system to let more people participate. Baxter argues that America has the resources to serve everyone, contends that state bars have a duty to unleash those resources, and prescribes a process to do so.
The Pitfalls and False Promises of Nonlawyer Ownership of Law Firms
Whether nonlawyers should have ownership roles in law firms is a hotly debated topic. This Essay argues against rewriting existing ethical rules to permit nonlawyer ownership because it both fails to solve the access-to-justice problem, as advocates claim it will, and threatens the independence of the legal profession.
The Overreach of Limits on “Legal Advice”
Nonlawyers, including court personnel, are typically prohibited from providing legal advice. But definitions of “legal advice” are unnecessarily broad, creating confusion, disadvantaging self-represented litigants, and possibly raising due-process concerns. This Essay argues for a narrower, more explicit definition of legal advice that advances, rather than undercuts, access to justice.
A Flood of Judicial Lobbying: Amicus Influence and Funding Transparency
This Essay explores how amicus briefs became a tool for coordinated judicial lobbying by dark-money interests. I show how current funding-disclosure rules for amici fail to provide genuine transparency—undermining fairness—and discuss reforms that could improve the judiciary’s amicus-disclosure regime and restore faith in the courts.
Lawyer Lies and Political Speech
Lawyer lies designed to sabotage valid election results are not protected political speech under the First Amendment. Ethics rules governing candor and frivolous litigation require sanctions, if not disbarment. Moreover, the duty of candor should be extended from the courthouse to the public square when lawyer lies threaten our democracy.
Pluralism, Polarization, and the Common Good: The Possibility of Modus Vivendi Legal Ethics
Scholars and critics of the legal profession often call on lawyers to represent clients in the public interest or with due regard for justice. However, in a climate of intense political polarization, rule-of-law values are of paramount significance for legal ethics.
Politics and Judicial Ethics: A Historical Perspective
This Essay explores the ethics and politics of extrajudicial activities from a distinctly historical perspective. While others have written about judges and their political and extrajudicial endeavors, this Essay situates its discussion within the evolution of judicial ethics codes, beginning in antiquity and proceeding to the present.
Staying Off the Sidelines: Judges as Agents for Justice System Reform
Chief Justice Bridget McCormack argues there is no ethical obstacle to judges working to improve the justice system. To the contrary: although ethical constraints limit the form of their advocacy, effective law reform depends on judges’ contributions and they are ethically obligated to improve the judicial system over which they preside.
Disability Law and the Case for Evidence-Based Triage in a Pandemic
When lifesaving medical treatments are scarce, disability law permits triage policies to consider patients’ probability of survival and post-treatment life expectancy. Evidence-based triage that considers these factors, rather than inaccurate stereotypes, can be not only legal and ethical, but consonant with the goals of disability law and advocacy.
Examining the Case for Socialized Law
In Equal Justice: Fair Legal Systems in an Unfair World, Frederick Wilmot-Smith argues that it is only by deprivatizing markets for legal services that we can ever hope to achieve equal justice. This Book Review explains why his bold prescription is worthy of serious examination and critical debate.
Who Gets the Ventilator? Disability Discrimination in COVID-19 Medical-Rationing Protocols
The coronavirus pandemic has forced us to take the threat of rationing life-saving treatments seriously. Many health systems employ protocols that explicitly deprioritize people for these treatments based on pre-existing disabilities. This argues that such protocols violate the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Affordable Care Act.
Transcending the Stigma of a Criminal Record: A Proposal to Reform State Bar Character and Fitness Evaluations
This Essay is rooted in the author’s experience as a formerly justice-involved individual who overcame numerous barriers to become an attorney and advocate. It argues that bar associations should use a conditional-approval process that informs applicants whether the bar intends to admit them before they begin law school.
Attorney for the Day: Measuring the Efficacy of In-Court Limited-Scope Representation
Using a unique dataset, this Note studies the impact of limited-scope representation and finds that unbundling legal services is an effective way to combat the civil-litigation justice gap. Based on those results, the Note recommends solutions that will both serve those who lack counsel and respect lawyers’ ethical duties.
Mere Negligence or Abandonment? Evaluating Claims of Attorney Misconduct After Maples v. Thomas
122 Yale L.J. 1328 (2013). In recent terms the Supreme Court has attempted to carve out remedies for habeas petitioners with negligent lawyers. This Note explores the analysis used by the Court in these cases and applies a novel descriptive model to explain how the Court has applied two different models of analysis, a performance-based model and a relationship-based model, to examine attorney behavior. Over twenty years ago, the Supreme Court applied a rigid relationship-based model in Coleman v. Thompson, in holding that habeas petitioners were bound by the acts and omissions of their attorneys because their attorneys were the petitioners' "agents." Last term, in Maples v. Thomas, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the application of agency principles in the habeas context, but carved out an exception for clients who are "abandoned" by their attorneys. This Note explores the potential scope of the "abandonment" exception, and argues that federal habeas courts should draw on principles drawn from civil litigation cases and apply a flexible approach to determining when a client has effectively been "abandoned" by his attorney.
In Defense of a Reasoned Dialogue About Law Firms and Their Sophisticated Clients
This Essay argues that the current ethical rules governing U.S.-based law firms are no longer adequate to meet the needs of commercial clients operating in multiple jurisdictions and that what is required is a single and uniform regulatory system for lawyers practicing in the United States. The Essay supports the Proposals submitted to the ABA 20/20 Commission by a group of law firm general counsel that sophisticated clients and their outside counsel should be able to enter binding and enforceable agreements governing such issues as advance conflicts waivers, a narrower definition of current client conflicts, and limitations of liability. The Essay broadly responds to and rejects the critique of the Proposals propounded by Larry Fox.
The Gang of Thirty-Three: Taking the Wrecking Ball to Client Loyalty
The attempts by some in the Bar to compromise client loyalty on the altar of law firm profits per partner is both unceasing and depressing. The proposals from many law firm General Counsels to change the Model Rules of Professional Conduct are particularly unflattering to the proponents and undermine this most important fiduciary duty. This Essay describes these calls for change and explains why they should be rejected.