{"id":109655,"date":"2025-03-04T08:29:22","date_gmt":"2025-03-04T16:29:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/03\/04\/legal-ethics-roundup-so-many-legal-ethics-headlines-engaging-in-democracy-ethics-jobs-more\/"},"modified":"2025-03-04T08:29:22","modified_gmt":"2025-03-04T16:29:22","slug":"legal-ethics-roundup-so-many-legal-ethics-headlines-engaging-in-democracy-ethics-jobs-more","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/03\/04\/legal-ethics-roundup-so-many-legal-ethics-headlines-engaging-in-democracy-ethics-jobs-more\/","title":{"rendered":"Legal Ethics Roundup: So Many Legal Ethics Headlines, Engaging In Democracy, Ethics Jobs & More"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Ed. note<\/u>: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup,\u00a0<\/strong>here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

Welcome to what captivates, haunts, inspires, and surprises me every week in the world of legal ethics.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Highlights from Last Week\u00a0\u2013 Top\u00a0Ten<\/s>\u00a0Eighteen (!) Headlines<\/h3>\n

We saw an overwhelming amount of news related to the ethics of lawyers and judges last week. Your \u201ctop ten\u201d list below really is eighteen headlines \u2014 I\u2019ve crammed extras into #3, #4, #6, #8, #9, and #10.<\/p>\n

#1 Prosecutor Ethics Failures Lead to New Trial for Man on Death Row.<\/strong>\u00a0From the\u00a0Washington Post<\/strong>: \u201cA divided Supreme Court on Tuesday took the extraordinary step of ordering a new trial for Oklahoma death row inmate\u00a0Richard Glossip<\/strong>, whose long-running appeal attracted broad\u00a0<\/strong>support after independent investigations revealed prosecutorial misconduct. Oklahoma\u2019s top law enforcement official, a Republican, agreed with Glossip\u2019s defense team that he did not receive a fair trial for a 1997 killing and should get another chance to go before a jury. Both sides say prosecutors suppressed important evidence and failed to correct false testimony from the key witness against Glossip.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0(gift link).<\/p>\n

#2 \u201cKPMG to Launch U.S. Law Firm Following Court Approval.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From the\u00a0Wall Street Journal<\/strong>: \u201cKPMG has begun to set up a law firm in the U.S. after a court decision made it the first Big Four accounting firm eligible to practice law in the country. The Arizona Supreme Court on Thursday granted the accounting giant final approval to obtain a license to create its own firm, KPMG Law. The move allows KPMG to greatly expand its legal offerings, for example, into services such as drafting and updating contracts and reconciling legal materials in merger-and-acquisition deals. At present, KPMG and other accounting firms offer limited legal services, such as advising clients on operations and technology for their legal teams. KPMG has previously said its Arizona-licensed lawyers would be able to do certain legal work for clients across the country once it received the court\u2019s approval. Thursday\u2019s clearance is expected to give the firm a leg up on its Big Four rivals through an expanded revenue stream as well as create new competition for law firms.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0(gift link).<\/p>\n

#3 \u201cSenator Kennedy Advises DOJ Nominees to Follow Federal Court Orders\u201d Meanwhile \u201cTrump Team Tightens Control Over Government Lawyers Who Might Say \u2018No\u2019.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0Two headlines for #3.\u00a0First<\/strong>, from C-SPAN: \u201cDuring a confirmation hearing for several Justice Department nominees, including\u00a0Solicitor General nominee John Sauer<\/strong>, Louisiana Republican\u00a0John Kennedy<\/strong>\u00a0advises them not to disregard federal court orders.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cDon\u2019t ever, ever take the position that you\u2019re not going to follow the order of a federal court, ever. You can disagree with it, within the bounds of legal ethics. You can criticize it, you can appeal it, or you can resign,\u201d Kennedy says.<\/p>\n

Read more and watch Kennedy\u2019s admonition to nominees\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.\u00a0Second<\/strong>, from the\u00a0New York Times<\/strong>: \u201cAfter\u00a0President Trump<\/strong>\u00a0lost the 2020 election, his allies thought about what to do differently if he returned to power. One lesson from his first term, they decided, was that government lawyers, even very conservative Republican political appointees, had frequently raised legal objections to ideas he or his White House advisers put forward. If they got another shot, they said in campaign-era interviews, they would install much more permissive gatekeepers. Now, a month into a term that has been defined by Mr. Trump\u2019s radical challenges to the basic structure of government, his administration is moving aggressively to curb a critical internal check: independent legal thinking.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0(gift link).<\/p>\n

#4 Fears of Retribution for Prosecutors and Other Lawyers.\u00a0<\/strong>Two headlines for #4.\u00a0First<\/strong>, from the\u00a0Washington Post:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cSeveral top prosecutors in the U.S. attorney\u2019s office in Washington, D.C., were demoted on Friday to low-level positions handling minor crimes, another step in a campaign of retribution against Justice Department officials perceived as enemies by the Trump administration. Those demoted include one prosecutor who had overseen all cases arising from the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and at least two who had worked on the trials of members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers militia, according to people with knowledge of the moves, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The abrupt personnel changes, announced in a series of emails sent by\u00a0Ed Martin<\/strong>, the interim U.S. attorney in Washington, were the latest upheavals in one of the country\u2019s most important federal prosecutors\u2019 offices.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>(gift link).\u00a0Second<\/strong>, from\u00a0Bloomberg Law<\/strong>: \u201cPresident Donald Trump\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0decision to punish\u00a0Covington & Burling<\/strong>\u00a0for representing former\u00a0Special Counsel Jack Smith<\/strong>\u00a0will feed some firms\u2019 worries about letting lawyers volunteer to represent former Justice Department attorneys. Private attorneys seeking to represent DOJ workers being forced out or investigated had already faced pushback from their firms\u2019 executive committees over concerns such work will hurt their brands and cut into billings, according to interviews with 12 attorneys. Some firm leaders, citing corporate clients threatening to walk if they get crosswise with Trump, have rejected outright or put up roadblocks to partners seeking approval to represent DOJ lawyers, FBI agents, and other civil servants who\u2019ve faced various forms of attack, three lawyers familiar with the decisions told Bloomberg Law. That was before Trump\u2019s\u00a0executive order<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0Tuesday pulling the security clearances of Covington lawyers and vowing to cancel any government business with the firm.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#5 Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove Faces Ethics Complaints.<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0MSNBC<\/strong>: \u201c[A]t least three complaints about [Bove] have been submitted to the relevant New York state body responsible for attorney discipline.\u00a0In a Feb. 19 letter<\/a><\/strong>, the nonprofit organization\u00a0American Oversight<\/strong>\u00a0requested an immediate investigation into whether Bove violated New York attorney conduct rules when handling the Adams case, including alleged attempts of his \u2018to induce other lawyers to engage in unethical behavior.\u2019 Two days later, the\u00a0Campaign for Accountability<\/strong>\u00a0submitted\u00a0<\/a>a similar complaint<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0not only to New York state, but also to the chief judge of the Southern District (SDNY), alleging that Bove\u2019s conduct in connection with the Adams case may have violated at least six different ethical rules. A third complaint, by a Democratic member of the New York State Senate,\u00a0<\/a>was submitted<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0to the state disciplinary committee that day as well.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#6 Recusals and Courtroom Policies \u2013 One Judge Recuses Over Policy Encouraging Underrepresented Lawyers; Another Judge Declines to Recuse Over Pronoun Policy.\u00a0<\/strong>Three headlines for #6.\u00a0First<\/strong>, from\u00a0Bloomberg Law<\/strong>: \u201cA Manhattan federal judge recused himself from a case involving PayPal Inc.\u2019s investment program for Black and Latino-led emerging venture-capital funds, after lawyers accused him of including racial preferences in his courtroom policies.\u00a0US District Judge Dale Ho\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0courtroom policies encourage \u2018the participation of less experienced attorneys,\u2019 including \u2018attorneys from backgrounds that historically have been underrepresented in the federal bar\u2019 where the lawyers played a substantial role in preparation for the case. Final decisions around who speaks for the client is up to the lead attorney on the case, not the court, the policies say.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.\u00a0Second<\/strong>, from\u00a0Reuters<\/strong>: \u201cA U.S. judge on Monday rejected arguments that he should recuse himself from hearing a lawsuit challenging a collegiate athletic association\u2019s policy on the participation of transgender athletes because of a courtroom protocol he adopted recommending lawyers refer to people by their preferred pronouns.\u00a0U.S. District Court Judge S. Kato Crews<\/strong>\u00a0in Denver\u00a0wrote<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>that lawyers for a group of women\u2019s collegiate volleyball players challenging the Mountain West Conference\u2019s policy were confusing \u2018respect and courtesy\u2019 for bias by the judge in their case.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.\u00a0Third<\/strong>, for additional commentary about both recusal decisions, check out\u00a0Howard Wasserman\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0(FIU Law) post \u2014 \u201cCourtroom Policies and Constitutional Substance\u201d \u2014 at\u00a0PrawfsBlawg<\/strong>\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#7 Texas Legislature and Supreme Court Diverge on Authority to Regulate Law Practice.<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0Bloomberg Law<\/strong>: \u201cWeeks before the Texas Supreme Court paused a plan\u2014championed by then\u00a0Chief Justice Nathan Hecht<\/strong>\u2014to let paralegals practice law in limited circumstances, four high ranking members of the state Legislature warned the court against the idea. \u2026\u00a0Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock<\/strong>\u00a0succeeded Hecht as the court\u2019s top judge in January. He doesn\u2019t share lawmaker concerns about the proposal and instead said it should be more expansive. Paralegals should provide basic legal services \u2018not just to the poor, but to all Texans,\u2019 he said, breaking with Hecht, whose proposal restricts it to Texans living at or below 200% of federal poverty guidelines.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#8 Federal Judiciary Needs More Judges, Enhanced Security, and Workplace Reforms for Bullying and Abuse.\u00a0<\/strong>Three headlines for #8.\u00a0First<\/strong>, from\u00a0USCourts.gov<\/strong>: \u201cWith federal courts across the country contending with mounting caseloads,\u00a0Judge Timothy M. Tymkovich<\/strong>, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, urged Congress today to create new district and court of appeals judgeships to meet growing workload demands. A hearing on\u00a0\u201c<\/a>Justice Delayed: The Crisis of Undermanned Federal Courts\u201d<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0was held by the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.\u00a0Second<\/strong>,\u00a0Gabe Roth<\/strong>\u00a0(Fix the Court) argues that the federal hearing should have covered more than just increased judicial seats, but also security and other issues. Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.\u00a0Third<\/strong>, from\u00a0NPR<\/strong>: \u201cIn the federal court system, law clerks find little recourse for bullying and abuse.\u201d Read more and listen\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#9 Lawyers Fined Thousands for Citing Fake Opinions.<\/strong>\u00a0Two headlines for #9.\u00a0First<\/strong>, from\u00a0Reuters<\/strong>: \u201cThree lawyers suing Walmart in a personal injury lawsuit must pay fines totaling $5,000 for citing fake cases generated by artificial intelligence in a court filing, a federal judge ruled. The lawyers, including two from national law firm Morgan & Morgan and one from a smaller firm, had an ethical obligation to ensure that the cases they cited were real,\u00a0U.S. District Judge Kelly Rankin<\/strong>\u00a0in Wyoming said in his\u00a0sanctions order<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0on Monday.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.\u00a0Second<\/strong>, from\u00a0Law360:<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cA Texas lawyer could face a $15,000 personal sanction and other potential discipline for filing three separate briefs using generative artificial intelligence that included fake citations in an Indiana ERISA case.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#10<\/strong>\u00a0A Tale of Two Bar Exams \u2014 California Bar \u201cHunts\u201d for Applicants Who Cheated on Flawed Exam; South Dakota Opens Practice-Based Alternative For Bar Exam.\u00a0<\/strong>Two headlines for #10.\u00a0First<\/strong>, from the\u00a0ABA Journal<\/strong>: \u201cThe State Bar of California will engage forensic experts to identify those who posted content from its new exam online, a move that forced it to push back the planned makeup exam of the troubled test riddled with a host of issues with proctors, connectivity and submission problems, according to a\u00a0Feb. 27 email<\/a><\/strong>. \u2026 Those involved in sharing the exam questions are \u2018subject to strict sanctions, including revocation of a previously granted positive moral character determination or denial of a pending moral character application,\u2019 according to the state bar email. \u2018In short, individuals who are found to have engaged in this type of prohibited and unethical behavior will find it difficult if not impossible to secure licensure with the State Bar of California.\u2019\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.\u00a0Second<\/strong>, from the\u00a0Watertown Public Opinion<\/strong>: \u201cAs many as 50 South Dakota law students will be able to bypass the bar exam over the next five years under a set of rules for alternative licensure recently approved by the state Supreme Court. The public pathways pilot program is an outgrowth of a yearslong debate on the value of the bar exam as a measure of fitness for legal service in the state. Those who pass an ethics test and successfully complete two years in a public service legal position, such as in a state\u2019s attorney\u2019s or public defender\u2019s office, would be in line for admittance to the state bar without a passing score on the exam.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>. (And check out the Recommended Reading below for more bar exam reform proposals.)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n

Democratic Engagement<\/h3>\n

Last week I promised more ideas for staying engaged in preserving our democracy beyond keeping up with the ethics headlines here at the LER. The best list of actions I\u2019ve seen comes from the organization\u00a0Protect Democracy<\/a><\/strong>, which includes among its\u00a0advisors<\/strong>\u00a0law professors\u00a0Aziz Huq<\/strong>\u00a0(Chicago),\u00a0Richard Primus<\/strong>\u00a0(Michigan), and\u00a0Kim Wehle<\/strong>\u00a0(Baltimore). The group has complied nearly 30 nonpartisan suggestions for individuals to roll up their sleeves and get engaged in preserving our democracy: \u201cDemocracy versus autocracy is more than just an abstract conflict between competing principles. When our nation shifts toward authoritarianism, it affects all of us. Quite literally, our lives, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are at stake. But it\u2019s also an opportunity: Our democracy has never quite been what it ought to be. So, shouldn\u2019t we try to make it the best we can? \u2026 [Here] are 29 concrete actions you can start taking right away. These actions can offer not only knowledge, relief, and power, but also joy, fun, and community. And of course, you don\u2019t have to do all of them to make an impact. Challenge yourself (and others!) to complete as many as you can in the coming year. Some take less than 30 seconds, some may take months, and some will never truly be complete. Protecting democracy is a generational struggle.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Recommended Reading<\/h3>\n

The first recommendation on this list picks up where the list of headlines left off, with\u00a0bar exam reforms<\/strong>. The next two recommendations offer more ideas about\u00a0democratic engagement<\/strong>, including a law review article by\u00a0Rebecca Green<\/strong>\u00a0(William and Mary) with suggestions for supporting local election officials and an op-ed by my former law professor colleague\u00a0Mark Totten<\/strong>\u00a0who most recently served as the US Attorney for the Western District of Michigan. The final recommendation is a Q&A with\u00a0Marin Levy<\/strong>\u00a0(Duke) about the role of courts and the importance of an independent judiciary, drawing from her recent book\u00a0Written and<\/a><\/strong><\/em>\u00a0<\/a><\/strong>Unwritten: The Rules, Internal Procedures, and Customs of the United States Court of Appeals<\/a><\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n

Recommendation #1: \u201cThe Keystone State Should Forge a New Path to Lawyer Licensure\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>by\u00a0Ashley London<\/strong>\u00a0(Duquesne),\u00a0Nachman N. Gutowski<\/strong>\u00a0(UNLV),\u00a0Steven Foster<\/strong>\u00a0(Oklahoma City), and\u00a0Sarah Garrison<\/strong>\u00a0(Detroit Mercy). From the abstract:<\/p>\n

\n

Pennsylvania should reject the adoption of the NextGen bar examination and instead develop a new, state-specific pathway to lawyer licensure that better serves the needs of the legal profession and the public. The NextGen exam, designed by the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE), introduces significant challenges, including its lack of transparency, inadequate preparation materials, and reliance on a rigid, memorization-heavy format. These deficiencies hinder equitable access to licensure, disproportionately affecting underrepresented groups and perpetuating systemic barriers within the profession. \u2026 Rejecting the NextGen model and creating a Pennsylvania-specific pathway would align with the state\u2019s history of leadership and innovation in legal standards. By prioritizing competency, transparency, and equity, Pennsylvania can establish a licensure system that meets the needs of future lawyers and the public they serve.<\/p>\n

Download from SSRN<\/strong>\u00a0<\/a>here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Recommendation #2: \u201cLegal Support for Local Election Officials\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0by\u00a0Rebecca Green<\/strong>\u00a0(William and Mary). From the abstract:<\/p>\n

\n

Lawyers provide a critical avenue of support for local election officials. They provide guidance on how to implement legislative mandates and judicial orders; they anticipate and prevent disputes from arising; and they represent election officials when they or their offices are sued-a more common occurrence today than ever. Although lawyers are crucial to ensuring election officials (and thus elections) can function, legal support for election officials is seldom discussed. Do election officials have adequate access to competent legal counsel? Are lawyers guiding and representing local election officials knowledgeable about how elections work and the laws that govern them? How does the increasingly tricky political terrain complicate LEO access to legal support? This Essay aims to start this conversation and spur study of how lawyers support local election officials in their work.<\/p>\n

Download from SSRN<\/strong>\u00a0<\/a>here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Recommendation #3: \u201cStates Must Hold Federal Government Accountable\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0by\u00a0Mark Totten<\/strong>. Here\u2019s an excerpt from his op-ed:<\/p>\n

\n

The past few weeks have marked a staggering assault on the rule of law in America. Nowhere is this menace clearer than at the U.S. Department of Justice. The rolling purge of DOJ employees deemed disloyal to President Donald Trump should send chills up the spine of every American. \u2026 I began my career at the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., and spent the last three years serving as the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Michigan \u2014 the chief federal law enforcement officer for the district, covering 49 of Michigan\u2019s 83 counties. At every turn, I was privileged to work with career civil servants passionately committed to the impartial administration of justice. Without exception, my colleagues demonstrated fierce and singular loyalty \u2014 not to me, and not to the occupant of the Oval Office, but to the law. Democracy demands nothing less. \u2026 These threats at DOJ and beyond demand a response. Individual and class-action lawsuits are gaining traction. Moreover, the states can act to constrain the federal government and hold its leaders accountable. \u2026 The law is slow, outcomes are uncertain, and the courts alone are not enough, but the judiciary can play an important role moving forward. \u2026 The rest is up to us, using lawful means of dissent and supporting those organizations that are pushing back. No citizen \u2014 Republican, Democrat, or independent \u2014 who believes in justice can look away.<\/p>\n

Read the full op-ed\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Recommendation #4: \u201cProfessor Marin K. Levy Discusses Checks, Balances, and the Independent Judiciary.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0Here\u2019s an excerpt from the Q&A:<\/p>\n

\n

Data shows attacks and intimidation of judges have been on the rise in recent years. Have there been other moments in history like this?<\/strong><\/p>\n

We have certainly had moments in the past in which there were efforts to intimidate judges and justices. For example, in the wake of\u00a0Brown v. Board of Education<\/em>\u00a0in 1954, there was a campaign to impeach Chief Justice Earl Warren. But I think what we are seeing today is different by an order of magnitude. As Chief Justice John Roberts noted in the\u00a02024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary<\/a><\/strong>, hostile threats and communications directed at judges have more than tripled over the past decade. In the past five years, the U.S. Marshals Service has investigated more than 1,000 serious threats against federal judges\u2014a figure that I fear will only grow. More recently, we have seen calls to impeach several members of the judiciary, accompanied by efforts to publicize their home addresses over disagreements with judicial decisions. These sorts of intimidation tactics invite wide-scale harassment of the sort that we simply have not seen before\u2014and they threaten the ability of judges to act independently.<\/p>\n

Read the full interview\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Legal Ethics in Pop Culture<\/h3>\n

Did you stay up too late watching the Academy Awards?\u00a0<\/strong>I did!\u00a0Zoe Salda\u00f1a<\/strong>\u00a0won Best Actress in a Supporting Role for portraying a lawyer who confronts a range of ethical dilemmas in the film\u00a0Emilia P\u00e9rez<\/a><\/strong><\/em>. To honor the awards season, the\u00a0ABA Journal<\/strong>\u00a0compiled a list of law-related films winning Oscars over the years. Check it out\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Academy Awards Red Carpet (Source: Wikimedia Commons)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Get Hired<\/h3>\n

Did you miss the 100+ job postings from previous weeks? Find them all\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n