Ed. note: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup, here.
Happy Monday!
Hello from California (again)! As I write you, I’m heading back from my week of leadership conferences where I managed to also catch some football in LA (even if it was a rough night for Sparty).
After announcing the publication of my new article Ethics Accountability: The Next Era for Lawyers and Judges last week I have another to share hot off the press🔥, this one co-authored with Hannah Johnson (Southern Illinois) and published in the U.C. Davis Law Review. You can download Dirty Laundry: A Book Review of Supreme Bias: Gender and Race in U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings by Christina L. Boyd, Paul M. Collins, Jr., and Lori A. Ringhand (Stanford University Press) for free at this link. Here’s a teaser.
I recently talked with Bloomberg Law reporter Ben Miller about the limits of bar discipline proceedings and you can read more about that conversation below at Headline #1. Speaking of headlines, let’s dive right in. Be sure to scroll to the end for a bonus headline – some special news about innovation and access to legal services from our friends down under. 🇦🇺
Highlights from Last Week – Top Ten Headlines
#1 “Bar Complaints Offer ‘Imperfect Tool’ to Challenge Trump’s DOJ.” From Bloomberg Law: “Justice Department lawyers—including political appointees and career staff—are facing bar complaints over their work defending the Trump administration, but complainants alleging ethical violations shouldn’t expect swift resolution. … ‘The disciplinary process is at times an imperfect tool for addressing actions by lawyers that run afoul of our ethical obligations,’ said Renee Knake Jefferson, a professor of legal ethics at the University of Houston Law Center. But the message that lawyers send to the public and their professional community by calling out perceived misconduct at the DOJ sets a critical standard, law professors and advocates said.” Read more here.
#2 “GOP Bill Seeks to Eliminate District Commission that Nominates DC Court Judges.” From ABC News: “Legislation that would eliminate the District of Columbia’s Judicial Nomination Commission (JNC) is among the 14 D.C.-related bills up for consideration by Congress. Currently, the JNC is responsible for selecting nominees to fill judicial vacancies in D.C.’s local courts: the Superior Court and the Court of Appeals. The seven-member commission includes appointments by the president, the mayor, the D.C. Council, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court, and the D.C. Bar. After the commission recommends candidates, the president makes appointments with Senate confirmation. The proposed bill would scrap this commission entirely.” Read more here.
#3 “America’s Judges are Under Attack – Lawyers Have a Duty to Defend Them.” From Kellye Testy (AALS) and Austen Parrish (UC Irvine) in The Hill: “American judges are under attack. Approximately one-third of the federal judiciary have received threats over the last year, and the U.S. Marshals Service reports more than 500 threats were made against federal judges over the past 11 months, with a noticeable spike in recent months. The sheer number of threats, including to judges’ families, are unprecedented.” Read more here.
#4 “New Study Confirms Your Associates Are Already Using ChatGPT. Here’s What To Do.” From JD Supra: “New research from the National Bureau of Economic Research reveals that 700 million people use ChatGPT weekly, and the demographics should terrify any managing partner still clinging to committee-approved AI pilots. Nearly half of all adult ChatGPT messages come from users under 26. Your incoming associate class doesn’t just know about AI; they’ve been using it daily since law school. … Here’s the uncomfortable truth: while your AI committee debates whether to approve a six-figure contract with a legal AI vendor, your associates are copying confidential client information into ChatGPT.. They’re not doing it maliciously. They’re doing it because the tool works, it’s free, and your firm’s official technology stack feels like using a typewriter in the iPhone era.” Read more here.
#5 “New Bluebook Rule On Citing to AI Generates Criticism from Legal Scholars and Practitioners.” From LawSites: “Has there ever been a time since the advent of legal reporting systems when citations have been under greater attack? Driven by their unwitting reliance on AI to generate legal briefs, lawyers seem to have forgotten everything they ever learned in law school about how to research and cite the law. Standing as a bulwark against this attack, one would think, is The Bluebook, the uniform system of citation that is among the first things taught to a first-year law student, and to which virtually all lawyers are expected to abide, except where excused by local rules of court. Yet now that very bulwark is itself under attack, thanks to the release last May of its 22nd edition, which introduced Rule 18.3, The Bluebook’s first standardized format for citing to generative artificial intelligence content. While the addition of AI citation guidance would seem to reflect The Bluebook’s expected role of evolving to address new types and formats of sources, the new rule has sparked criticism from legal scholars and practitioners who argue it is fundamentally flawed in both conception and execution.” Read more here.
#6 “Fani Willis Must Remain off Trump Case after Georgia Supreme Court Rejects Her Appeal.” From USA Today: “The Supreme Court of Georgia is leaving in place an appeals court decision that disqualified Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from prosecuting President Donald Trump because of her romantic relationship with a special prosecutor on the case. … Four Georgia Supreme Court justices came together to form a majority in the decision to turn down the appeal. Three justices dissented. One further justice didn’t participate in the decision, and one justice was disqualified.” Read more here.
#7 “Training Better Lawyers.” From Daniel Theis in the Washington Post: “Attacks on the Council of the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, the only national accreditor of law schools, ignore the value of the council’s work on behalf of students and the practice of law. The council accredits a wide range of law schools. The consistent quality of accredited schools equips graduates to serve their clients and the public. In 2024, the overall bar exam passage rate for graduates of accredited law schools was 44 percentage points higher than for nonaccredited schools. … Finally, our work is separate and independent from the general ABA and is nonpartisan. Whatever one thinks of the politics of the ABA, it is not involved in council enforcement actions, does not choose council personnel and cannot dictate the content of any standard. Lawyers perform vital work for their clients, and accrediting the schools that train these lawyers comes with a profound responsibility. The council has met this responsibility for more than a century.” Read more here. [Full disclosure: I am an elected member of the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, and Daniel Theis is the Chair of the Council.]
#8 “Tennessee Joins States Eying End to ABA’s Role in Law School Accreditation.” From Reuters: “Tennessee is considering whether to stop relying on the American Bar Association to accredit law schools in the state, joining Florida, Texas and Ohio in reconsidering the organization’s primary role in U.S. legal education. The Supreme Court of Tennessee on Tuesday asked the public to weigh in on a series of potential reforms to how the state licenses lawyers and regulates law firms.” Read more here.
#9 “Former US Judges Defend Judicial Independence as Threats Rise.” From Bloomberg Law: “Former federal judges are taking advantage of Constitution Day to speak out against threats against sitting judges. A letter signed by 42 former judges and published Wednesday on the anniversary of the document’s signing in 1787 says as judges they took oaths to ‘support and defend the Constitution.’ The signatories were appointed by presidents of both parties, including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, and are members of the group Keep Our Republic’s Article III Coalition. The former judges said while sitting judges are limited in being able to speak publicly, they ‘are no longer so constrained.’ Federal judges have come under attack by Trump and his allies for rulings that block the administration’s policies. That dynamic has also combined with increased threats against federal judges in recent years.” Read more here.
#10 “Insurance for In-House Counsel: Understanding ‘Employed Lawyer’ Policies.” From JD Supra: “Do in-house lawyers need their own malpractice insurance? Some might. If needed, the type of insurance in-house counsel should explore is called employed lawyers professional liability (ELPL) insurance.” Read more here.
Bonus Headline! 🇦🇺
#11 News from Down Under – RMIT and Anika Legal Launch New Partnership to Provide Legal Help to Those in Need. From Noel Lim (Anika Legal) on LinkedIn: “Last night two historic things were launched: the RMIT Law School [partnership], and the RMIT x Anika Legal Virtual Student Clinic. When we started Anika back in 2018, I knew partnerships with law schools would be critical. What I didn’t know was how tough it would be – doors closed, ideas dismissed, and even a meeting that brought a co-founder to tears. That’s why this milestone means so much. Thank you to RMIT University for believing in Anika’s vision – backing innovation, social justice, and students. Together, we’ve built a clinic that helps hundreds of renters stay in safe homes each year, while giving law students the chance to change lives from day one of their careers. … And to make this partnership even stronger Anika is moving our office onto the RMIT campus!.” Read more here. [Side note: Noel was one of the first people I met with when conducting research on law and innovation as part of my work as the Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Entrepreneurship and Innovation where I was hosted by Australia’s RMIT University Law School in 2019. So I am thrilled to see this partnership! Congrats to Anika Legal and RMIT Law!]
Get Hired
Did you miss the 350+ job postings from previous weeks? Find them all here.
Upcoming Ethics Events & Other Announcements
Did you miss an announcement from previous weeks? Find them all here.
Keep in Touch
News tips? Announcements? Events? A job to post? Reading recommendations? Email legalethics@substack.com – but be sure to subscribe first, otherwise the email won’t be delivered.
Renee Knake Jefferson holds the endowed Doherty Chair in Legal Ethics and is a Professor of Law at the University of Houston. Check out more of her writing at the Legal Ethics Roundup. Find her on X (formerly Twitter) at @reneeknake or Bluesky at legalethics.bsky.social.
The post Legal Ethics Roundup: Judicial Threats, DA Willis Out Over Romance, TN Joins Accreditor Scrutiny, New AI Bluebook Rule & More appeared first on Above the Law.
Ed. note: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup,here.
Happy Monday!
Hello from California (again)! As I write you, I’m heading back from my week of leadership conferences where I managed to also catch some football in LA (even if it was a rough night for Sparty).
After announcing the publication of my new article Ethics Accountability: The Next Era for Lawyers and Judges last week I have another to share hot off the press, this one co-authored with Hannah Johnson (Southern Illinois) and published in the U.C. Davis Law Review. You can download Dirty Laundry: A Book Review of Supreme Bias: Gender and Race in U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings by Christina L. Boyd, Paul M. Collins, Jr., and Lori A. Ringhand (Stanford University Press) for free at this link. Here’s a teaser.
I recently talked with Bloomberg Law reporter Ben Miller about the limits of bar discipline proceedings and you can read more about that conversation below at Headline #1. Speaking of headlines, let’s dive right in. Be sure to scroll to the end for a bonus headline – some special news about innovation and access to legal services from our friends down under.
#1 “Bar Complaints Offer ‘Imperfect Tool’ to Challenge Trump’s DOJ.” From Bloomberg Law: “Justice Department lawyers—including political appointees and career staff—are facing bar complaints over their work defending the Trump administration, but complainants alleging ethical violations shouldn’t expect swift resolution. … ‘The disciplinary process is at times an imperfect tool for addressing actions by lawyers that run afoul of our ethical obligations,’ said Renee Knake Jefferson, a professor of legal ethics at the University of Houston Law Center. But the message that lawyers send to the public and their professional community by calling out perceived misconduct at the DOJ sets a critical standard, law professors and advocates said.” Read more here.
#2 “GOP Bill Seeks to Eliminate District Commission that Nominates DC Court Judges.” From ABC News: “Legislation that would eliminate the District of Columbia’s Judicial Nomination Commission (JNC) is among the 14 D.C.-related bills up for consideration by Congress. Currently, the JNC is responsible for selecting nominees to fill judicial vacancies in D.C.’s local courts: the Superior Court and the Court of Appeals. The seven-member commission includes appointments by the president, the mayor, the D.C. Council, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court, and the D.C. Bar. After the commission recommends candidates, the president makes appointments with Senate confirmation. The proposed bill would scrap this commission entirely.” Read more here.
#3 “America’s Judges are Under Attack – Lawyers Have a Duty to Defend Them.” From Kellye Testy (AALS) and Austen Parrish (UC Irvine) in The Hill: “American judges are under attack. Approximately one-third of the federal judiciary have received threats over the last year, and the U.S. Marshals Service reports more than 500 threatswere made against federal judges over the past 11 months, with a noticeable spike in recent months. The sheer number of threats, including to judges’ families, are unprecedented.” Read more here.
#4 “New Study Confirms Your Associates Are Already Using ChatGPT. Here’s What To Do.” From JD Supra: “New research from the National Bureau of Economic Research reveals that 700 million people use ChatGPT weekly, and the demographics should terrify any managing partner still clinging to committee-approved AI pilots. Nearly half of all adult ChatGPT messages come from users under 26. Your incoming associate class doesn’t just know about AI; they’ve been using it daily since law school. … Here’s the uncomfortable truth: while your AI committee debates whether to approve a six-figure contract with a legal AI vendor, your associates are copying confidential client information into ChatGPT.. They’re not doing it maliciously. They’re doing it because the tool works, it’s free, and your firm’s official technology stack feels like using a typewriter in the iPhone era.” Read more here.
#5 “New Bluebook Rule On Citing to AI Generates Criticism from Legal Scholars and Practitioners.” From LawSites: “Has there ever been a time since the advent of legal reporting systems when citations have been under greater attack? Driven by their unwitting reliance on AI to generate legal briefs, lawyers seem to have forgotten everything they ever learned in law school about how to research and cite the law. Standing as a bulwark against this attack, one would think, is The Bluebook, the uniform system of citation that is among the first things taught to a first-year law student, and to which virtually all lawyers are expected to abide, except where excused by local rules of court. Yet now that very bulwark is itself under attack, thanks to the release last May of its 22nd edition, which introduced Rule 18.3, The Bluebook’s first standardized format for citing to generative artificial intelligence content. While the addition of AI citation guidance would seem to reflect The Bluebook’s expected role of evolving to address new types and formats of sources, the new rule has sparked criticism from legal scholars and practitioners who argue it is fundamentally flawed in both conception and execution.” Read more here.
#6 “Fani Willis Must Remain off Trump Case after Georgia Supreme Court Rejects Her Appeal.” From USA Today: “The Supreme Court of Georgia is leaving in place an appeals court decision that disqualified Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from prosecuting President Donald Trump because of her romantic relationship with a special prosecutor on the case. … Four Georgia Supreme Court justices came together to form a majority in the decision to turn down the appeal. Three justices dissented. One further justice didn’t participate in the decision, and one justice was disqualified.” Read more here.
#7 “Training Better Lawyers.” From Daniel Theis in the Washington Post: “Attacks on the Council of the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, the only national accreditor of law schools, ignore the value of the council’s work on behalf of students and the practice of law. The council accredits a wide range of law schools. The consistent quality of accredited schools equips graduates to serve their clients and the public. In 2024, the overall bar exam passage rate for graduates of accredited law schools was 44 percentage points higher than for nonaccredited schools. … Finally, our work is separate and independent from the general ABA and is nonpartisan. Whatever one thinks of the politics of the ABA, it is not involved in council enforcement actions, does not choose council personnel and cannot dictate the content of any standard. Lawyers perform vital work for their clients, and accrediting the schools that train these lawyers comes with a profound responsibility. The council has met this responsibility for more than a century.” Read more here. [Full disclosure: I am an elected member of the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, and Daniel Theis is the Chair of the Council.]
#8 “Tennessee Joins States Eying End to ABA’s Role in Law School Accreditation.” From Reuters: “Tennessee is considering whether to stop relying on the American Bar Association to accredit law schools in the state, joining Florida, Texas and Ohio in reconsidering the organization’s primary role in U.S. legal education. The Supreme Court of Tennessee on Tuesday asked the public to weigh in on a series of potential reforms to how the state licenses lawyers and regulates law firms.” Read more here.
#9 “Former US Judges Defend Judicial Independence as Threats Rise.” From Bloomberg Law: “Former federal judges are taking advantage of Constitution Day to speak out against threats against sitting judges. A letter signed by 42 former judges and published Wednesday on the anniversary of the document’s signing in 1787 says as judges they took oaths to ‘support and defend the Constitution.’ The signatories were appointed by presidents of both parties, including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, and are members of the group Keep Our Republic’s Article III Coalition. The former judges said while sitting judges are limited in being able to speak publicly, they ‘are no longer so constrained.’ Federal judges have come under attack by Trump and his allies for rulings that block the administration’s policies. That dynamic has also combined with increased threats against federal judges in recent years.” Read more here.
#10 “Insurance for In-House Counsel: Understanding ‘Employed Lawyer’ Policies.” From JD Supra: “Do in-house lawyers need their own malpractice insurance? Some might. If needed, the type of insurance in-house counsel should explore is called employed lawyers professional liability (ELPL) insurance.” Read more here.
Bonus Headline!
#11 News from Down Under – RMIT and Anika Legal Launch New Partnership to Provide Legal Help to Those in Need. From Noel Lim (Anika Legal) on LinkedIn: “Last night two historic things were launched: the RMIT Law School [partnership], and the RMIT x Anika Legal Virtual Student Clinic. When we started Anika back in 2018, I knew partnerships with law schools would be critical. What I didn’t know was how tough it would be – doors closed, ideas dismissed, and even a meeting that brought a co-founder to tears. That’s why this milestone means so much. Thank you to RMIT University for believing in Anika’s vision – backing innovation, social justice, and students. Together, we’ve built a clinic that helps hundreds of renters stay in safe homes each year, while giving law students the chance to change lives from day one of their careers. … And to make this partnership even stronger Anika is moving our office onto the RMIT campus!.” Read more here. [Side note: Noel was one of the first people I met with when conducting research on law and innovation as part of my work as the Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Entrepreneurship and Innovation where I was hosted by Australia’s RMIT University Law School in 2019. So I am thrilled to see this partnership! Congrats to Anika Legal and RMIT Law!]
Did you miss the 350+ job postings from previous weeks? Find them all here.
Did you miss an announcement from previous weeks? Find them all here.
News tips? Announcements? Events? A job to post? Reading recommendations? Email [email protected] – but be sure to subscribe first, otherwise the email won’t be delivered.
Renee Knake Jefferson holds the endowed Doherty Chair in Legal Ethics and is a Professor of Law at the University of Houston. Check out more of her writing at the Legal Ethics Roundup. Find her on X (formerly Twitter) at @reneeknake or Bluesky at legalethics.bsky.social.
