A Misguided Proposed Ethics Rule Change:
ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) and the States
The ABA adopted Model Rule 8.4(g) in August 2016. The new proposed rule only goes into effect, however, if it is adopted in a state. As of October 2017, only one state, Vermont, had adopted the new rule.
To understand the issues surrounding ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) in a nutshell, watch this two-minute video by First Amendment scholar Professor Eugene Volokh, in which he explains why ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) is a speech code for lawyers, and read CLS Executive Director David Nammo’s latest letter regarding the problems with ABA Model Rule 8.4(g).
For a more in-depth discussion of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g), watch the debate held by The Federalist Society between Professor Volokh and Rob Weiner.
Additionally, Center Director Kim Colby wrote a memorandum discussing the pitfalls of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g).
Shortly after the ABA adopted Model Rule 8.4(g), the ABA sent a letter to every state supreme court asking it to also adopt ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). The model rule, therefore, is on the radar of every state supreme court and is, in that sense, “under consideration.”
Each state may determine for itself whether to adopt ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). The ABA claims that twenty-four states already have a black-letter rule like Model Rule 8.4(g), but that claim is not accurate. Twenty-four states have a rule that addresses "bias" in some way, but no state, except Vermont, has a rule as overly broad in scope as ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). Thirteen states have a more restricted comment rather than a black-letter rule. The remaining fourteen states have neither a comment nor a black-letter rule.
Some states have already publicly proposed adoption of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). CLS was able to file a letter opposing ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) in every state in which CLS was aware of an open comment period. Read CLS Executive Director David Nammo’s letters to the following states:
- District of Columbia
- New Hampshire
- South Carolina
Work needs to be done in all 50 states, regardless of whether a new rule has been publicly proposed there or not. Some state bars or state supreme courts want to push ABA Model Rule 8.4(g), and CLS wants to help individuals in the states educate their state bars and state courts as to the immense problems posed by ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). CLS has developed resources to help attorneys explain the problems with Model Rule 8.4(g).
CLS has attorney members in almost all states and the District of Columbia. In several states, concerned attorneys have already succeeded in educating their peers as to the reasons why Model Rule 8.4(g) should not be adopted in their state. We have listed on the right the states where we are aware there has been some talk or consideration of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g).
We recommend the following resources as you continue to look into this matter:
ABA Journal Article, October 2017
The Christian Lawyer Article The Evolution of the New ABA Model Rule 8.4(g)
Comparison of State Black-Letter Rules to Model Rule 8.4(g
Expressing Conscience with Candor: Saint Thomas More and First Freedoms in the Legal Profession by Michael McGinniss
The ABA Decision to Control What Lawyers Say: Supporting “Diversity” But Not Diversity of Thought by Ronald D. Rotunda
A Speech Code for Lawyers, Banning Viewpoints that Express ‘Bias,’ including in Law-Related Social Activities by Eugene Volokh
Texas Attorney General Letter Concerning the Unconstitutionality of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g)
Louisiana Attorney General Letter against Adoption of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g)
South Carolina Attorney General Letter against Adoption of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g)
Tennessee Attorney General Letter against Adoption of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g)
CLS Letter to the ABA Opposing Adoption of Model Rule 8.4(g), March 16, 2016