{"id":123792,"date":"2025-06-23T11:02:33","date_gmt":"2025-06-23T19:02:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/06\/23\/legal-ethics-roundup-ca-upholds-eastman-disbarment-toxic-work-culture-for-federal-clerks-aba-sues-trump-honoring-juneteenth-more\/"},"modified":"2025-06-23T11:02:33","modified_gmt":"2025-06-23T19:02:33","slug":"legal-ethics-roundup-ca-upholds-eastman-disbarment-toxic-work-culture-for-federal-clerks-aba-sues-trump-honoring-juneteenth-more","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/06\/23\/legal-ethics-roundup-ca-upholds-eastman-disbarment-toxic-work-culture-for-federal-clerks-aba-sues-trump-honoring-juneteenth-more\/","title":{"rendered":"Legal Ethics Roundup: CA Upholds Eastman Disbarment; Toxic Work Culture For Federal Clerks; ABA Sues Trump; Honoring Juneteenth & More"},"content":{"rendered":"

Ed. note<\/u>: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back 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

Hello from San Antonio, where I attended the\u00a0State Bar of Texas Annual Meeting<\/strong>\u00a0last week. A highlight was my husband\u00a0Wallace B. Jefferson\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0keynote speech delivered on\u00a0Juneteenth<\/a><\/strong>, where he recounted his incredible personal story as a descendant of enslaved people who became the first African American Justice and Chief Justice on the Supreme Court of Texas. You can read more about his story in\u00a0this article<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0published by Duke Law\u2019s Judicature magazine in 2023. Here\u2019s a preview:<\/p>\n

\n

Thirty-three years after\u00a0Martin Luther King\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cI Have a Dream\u201d speech at the Lincoln Memorial, I visited Washington, D.C., for the first time. It was Tuesday, Nov. 5, 1996 \u2014 a presidential Election Day. That morning, I argued my first case before the United States Supreme Court:\u00a0Board of Commissioners of Bryan County v. Brown<\/em>. \u2026 I would stand at the same podium where Thurgood Marshall challenged \u201cseparate but equal\u201d in\u00a0Brown v. Board of Education<\/em>. The ironies were inescapable: \u2026\u00a0Brown v. Board<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0Board v. Brown<\/em>;\u00a0Thurgood Marshall<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0Wallace Jefferson<\/strong>\u00a0\u2014 two lawyers who became the first African American justices on their respective supreme courts. These eerie correlations reminded me of the \u201cunfinished work\u201d that\u00a0Lincoln<\/strong>\u00a0invoked in his\u00a0Gettysburg Address<\/em>: that we must dedicate ourselves to the same noble cause for which those who fought gave their last full measure of devotion. And our work is\u00a0not<\/em>\u00a0finished. We are not yet a perfect union. But we are a union. And for our union to thrive, we must learn how to get along. Divided, we cannot stand. \u2026<\/p>\n

I won that case before the Supreme Court.\u00a0Justice Sandra Day O\u2019Connor<\/strong>, the first woman ever to serve on the Court, wrote the opinion. When students at San Antonio\u2019s\u00a0Wallace B. Jefferson Middle School<\/strong>\u00a0graduate, their next stop is the\u00a0Sandra Day O\u2019Connor High School<\/strong>. This is not irony but the product of a nation that embraces the radical proposition that all men and women are created equal.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

And now for your headlines, which span the past two weeks because last week, of course, featured the\u00a0Second Annual LER Summer Reading List<\/a><\/strong>. (Be sure to check it out if you missed it!)<\/p>\n

Highlights from Past Couple of Weeks \u2013 Top Ten Headlines<\/h3>\n

#1<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cCalifornia Court Upholds John Eastman\u2019s Disbarment for Role in Trump 2020 Plot.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0Politico<\/strong>: \u201cA California court\u00a0has upheld a recommendation<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0that attorney\u00a0John Eastman<\/strong>\u00a0should lose his law license because of his central role in\u00a0President Donald Trump\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0effort to subvert the 2020 election. A three-judge \u2018review panel\u2019 of the California State Bar Court found that Eastman\u2019s conduct was so egregious \u2014 and his remorse so lacking \u2014 that the only remedy was to permanently prohibit him from practicing law. \u2026 A judge of the State Bar Court,\u00a0Yvette Roland<\/strong>, had recommended Eastman\u2019s disbarment last year, a ruling that immediately resulted in Eastman\u2019s suspension from practicing law.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#2<\/strong>\u00a0Puerto Rico Adopts Duty of Technology Competence and Allows Non-Lawyer Ownership In New Rules of Professional Conduct.<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0Robert Ambrogi<\/strong>\u00a0in\u00a0LawSites<\/strong>: \u201cI\u00a0wrote yesterday<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0about the\u00a0Puerto Rico Supreme Court\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0adoption of the duty of technology competence, done as part of its promulgation of new rules of professional conduct to replace a code of ethics that had governed lawyers\u2019 professional conduct in Puerto Rico since 1970. While Puerto Rico modeled its new\u00a0Rules of Professional Conduct<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0on the\u00a0American Bar Association\u2019s Model Rules<\/a><\/strong>, it diverged from the ABA in two significant respects. One, as I explained in yesterday\u2019s post, was to add a separate rule devoted to the duty of technology competence, rather than address the duty through a comment to the general rule on competence, as the ABA does. The other \u2014 and potentially more significant \u2014 divergence was to revise Rule 5.4 to allow non-lawyers to have ownership interests in law firms.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#3<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cTrump\u2019s Strategy in Law Firm Cases: Lose, Don\u2019t Appeal, Yet Prevail.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From the\u00a0New York Times<\/strong>: \u201cThe Trump administration is ordinarily quick to appeal its losses. \u2026 But administration lawyers have done nothing to challenge a series of stinging rulings rejecting Mr. Trump\u2019s efforts to punish prominent law firms for what he called \u2018conduct detrimental to critical American interests\u2019 by representing clients and causes not to his liking. The administration\u2019s unconventional litigation strategy is telling, said\u00a0W. Bradley Wendel<\/strong>, a law professor at Cornell who is an authority on legal ethics. \u2018They knew that these were losing positions from the beginning and were not actually hoping to win in court, but rather to intimidate firms into settling, as many firms did,\u2019 he said. \u2018Now that they have racked up the four losses in district courts, it is not surprising that they are not appealing, because I don\u2019t think they ever thought these were serious positions.\u2019\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0(gift link).<\/p>\n

#4<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cAmerican Bar Association Sues to Block Trump\u2019s Attacks on Law Firms.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0Reuters<\/strong>: \u201cThe American Bar Association sued the Trump administration on Monday, seeking an order that would bar the White House from pursuing what the ABA called a campaign of intimidation against major law firms. The lawsuit,\u00a0<\/a>filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., said the administration violated the U.S. Constitution in a series of executive orders targeting law firms over their past clients and lawyers they hired.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>. Download the complaint\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>, and read the ABA\u2019s press release about the lawsuit\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

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

#5<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cSupreme Court Disclosures Detail Millions in Justices Book Payments.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0The Hill<\/strong>: \u201cThe Supreme Court justices\u2019 annual financial disclosures were released Tuesday, revealing millions of dollars in combined book payments to the justices in 2024.\u00a0Justice<\/strong>\u00a0Ketanji Brown Jackson\u00a0<\/strong>took in the most,\u00a0disclosing<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0a<\/a>\u00a0nearly $2.07 million book advance from Penguin Random House, which published her memoir, \u2018Lovely One,\u2019 in September. Jackson received nearly $894,000 the year prior.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#6<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cFederal Judges are Powerful. Some of Their Law Clerks Describe a Toxic Work Culture.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0NPR<\/strong>: \u201cFor more than a year,\u00a0NPR has investigated serious misconduct in the federal judiciary<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0\u2014 and how difficult it is to hold judges accountable. At one end of the spectrum, we heard from clerks who alleged\u00a0<\/a>they suffered sexual assaults, bullying, and pregnancy discrimination. But the power imbalance between judges and their young clerks also fuels a broader, more insidious culture, where clerks are expected to surrender control over nearly every aspect of their lives.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

#7<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cMichigan Law Review Sued for Alleged Racial, Sexual Bias. School Vows Vigorous Defense.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From the\u00a0Detroit News<\/strong>: \u201cA conservative civil rights organization is asking a federal judge to order the\u00a0Michigan Law Review<\/strong>\u00a0Association to stop using race and sex preferences to select its members and articles and appoint a court monitor to oversee future decisions by the nonprofit. In a lawsuit filed Wednesday in\u00a0U.S. District Court in Detroit<\/strong>, a group called the\u00a0Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences<\/strong>, or FASORP, accused the association for the law journal of the\u00a0University of Michigan Law School<\/strong>\u00a0of excluding articles from conservative White students and using race and sex preferences to select its members and articles. \u2026 The group is suing on behalf of three unnamed White male, heterosexual law professors who have submitted articles to the Michigan Law Review in the past and were all rejected. \u2018Individuals A, B, and C are unable to compete on an equal basis with authors who are women, racial minorities, homosexuals, or individuals who engage in gender-nonconforming behavior or identify with a gender that departs from their biological sex,\u2019 according to the lawsuit.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>. (Full disclosure: my forthcoming piece \u201cWhen Lawyers Protest\u201d will be published by the Michigan Law Review in 2026).<\/p>\n

#8<\/strong>\u00a0Legal Ethics Scholars File Amicus Brief in Villarreal v. Texas<\/strong>. Along with several other legal ethics scholars, I joined an amicus brief filed in\u00a0Villarreal v. Texas<\/strong>, a case the US Supreme Court will take up during the 2025 term. At issue is whether a trial court violates a defendant\u2019s Sixth Amendment right to counsel by prohibiting the defendant and his lawyer from discussing testimony during an overnight recess. We argue that a ban on discussions like this jeopardizes the lawyer\u2019s compliance with core professional responsibilities and undermines attorney-client privilege and the duty of confidentiality. Read more and download the amicus brief\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

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

#9<\/strong>\u00a0The Ethics of Book Awards, Law Course Titles, and Free Speech.<\/strong>\u00a0Two headlines for #8.\u00a0First<\/strong>, from the\u00a0New York Times<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cA White Nationalist Wrote a Law School Paper Promoting Racist Views. It Won Him an Award.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cPreston Damsky<\/strong>\u00a0is a law student at the University of Florida. He is also a white nationalist and antisemite. Last fall, he took a seminar taught by a federal judge on \u2018originalism,\u2019 the legal theory favored by many conservatives that seeks to interpret the Constitution based on its meaning when it was adopted. In his capstone paper for the class, Mr. Damsky argued that the framers had intended for the phrase \u2018We the People,\u2019 in the Constitution\u2019s preamble, to refer exclusively to white people. \u2026 At the end of the semester, Mr. Damsky, 29, was given the \u2018book award,\u2019 which designated him as the best student in the class. According to the syllabus, the capstone counted the most toward final grades. \u2026 The Trump-nominated judge who taught the class,\u00a0John L. Badalamenti<\/strong>, declined to comment for this article, and does not appear to have publicly discussed why he chose Mr. Damsky for the award. That left some students and faculty members at the law school, considered Florida\u2019s most prestigious, to wonder, and to worry: What merit could the judge have seen in it? \u2026 In January,\u00a0Carliss Chatman<\/strong>, an associate law professor at Southern Methodist University, began a stint as a visiting scholar at the school. It was not long, she said, before a number of Black and Jewish students came to her with concerns about Mr. Damsky. Ms. Chatman was struck, in part, by her own experiences at the school in contrast to Mr. Damsky\u2019s award. She had proposed teaching a class during her time there called \u2018Race, Entrepreneurship and Inequality.\u2019 But administrators at the law school changed the name to \u2018Entrepreneurship, she said, before listing it in the course catalog. \u2026 \u2018I just find it fascinating that this student can write an article, a series of articles that are essentially manifestoes, and that\u2019s free speech,\u2019 Ms. Chatman said, referring to Mr. Damsky, \u2018but my class can\u2019t be called \u2018Race, Entrepreneurship and Inequality.\u2019\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0(gift link).\u00a0Second<\/strong>, from\u00a0Josh Blackman<\/strong>\u00a0in\u00a0The Volokh Conspiracy<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cThe New York Times Launches An Unfair Attack On Judge Badalamenti.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#10<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cPam Bondi\u2019s Brother Overwhelmingly Defeated in Heated Race to Lead the D.C. Bar.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0NPR<\/strong>: \u201cEmployment attorney\u00a0Diane Seltzer<\/strong>\u00a0has won a closely watched contest to lead the D.C. Bar Association, defeating securities lawyer\u00a0Brad Bondi<\/strong>\u00a0in a race with record turnout. Seltzer tallied more than 90 percent of the electronic vote with \u2018no issues or irregularities\u2019 in the voting system,\u00a0D.C. Bar CEO Bob Spagnoletti<\/strong>\u00a0said in a press call Monday. More than 38,000 people voted in the race, more than five times as many voters in a typical election, he said. The race became a microcosm for the clashes and pressures on the American legal system this year, in part because one of the two top candidates is the younger brother of\u00a0Attorney General Pam Bondi<\/strong>.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Get Hired<\/h3>\n

Did you miss the 150+ job postings from previous Roundups? Find them all\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Upcoming Ethics Events & Other Announcements<\/h3>\n

Did you miss an announcement from previous Roundups? Find them all\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Keep in Touch<\/h3>\n