{"id":157562,"date":"2026-07-20T15:43:23","date_gmt":"2026-07-20T23:43:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/07\/20\/legal-ethics-roundup-scotus-justices-testify-about-enforceable-ethics-20-ags-want-clark-discipline-challenge-dismissed-law-democratized-on-lawnext-more\/"},"modified":"2026-07-20T15:43:23","modified_gmt":"2026-07-20T23:43:23","slug":"legal-ethics-roundup-scotus-justices-testify-about-enforceable-ethics-20-ags-want-clark-discipline-challenge-dismissed-law-democratized-on-lawnext-more","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/07\/20\/legal-ethics-roundup-scotus-justices-testify-about-enforceable-ethics-20-ags-want-clark-discipline-challenge-dismissed-law-democratized-on-lawnext-more\/","title":{"rendered":"Legal Ethics Roundup:\u00a0SCOTUS Justices Testify About Enforceable Ethics, 20 AGs Want Clark Discipline Challenge Dismissed, Law Democratized On LawNext & 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

Happy Monday!<\/p>\n

As promised last week, my\u00a0LawNext Podcast interview<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0with\u00a0Bob Ambrogi<\/strong>\u00a0is now out. From the teaser:<\/p>\n

\n

Martin Luther King famously said, \u201cThe arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.\u201d My guest today quoted his words in her 2024 book,\u00a0Law Democratized: A Blueprint for Solving the Justice Crisis<\/a><\/strong>. But now, two years after that book\u2019s publication \u2014 at a moment when many see the rule of law under strain and speak openly of democratic backsliding \u2014 it is fair to ask: Are we still arcing toward justice?<\/p>\n

That is the question LawNext host Bob Ambrogi put to Renee Knake Jefferson at the start of today\u2019s conversation. \u2026 Renee and Bob talk in depth about the access to justice crisis and what can be done to narrow the justice gap, including why the biggest barrier to legal help may be that people do not even recognize they have a legal problem. They also discuss the promise and peril of AI as a tool for closing the justice gap, why regulatory reform has not produced the domino effect many once predicted, and what lawyers, law schools, regulators and innovators can each do to move the needle.<\/p>\n

Spoiler alert: Jefferson remains a glass-half-full optimist \u2014 and by the end of this conversation, you may be too.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

I hope you\u2019ll\u00a0give it a listen<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

And a quick editorial note before diving into the headlines. Last week some of you received a work-in-progress version of the LER with the subject line missing and wrong date. Apologies for that! The post has been revised, and you can find the updated version here:\u00a0LER No. 140 \u2013 Cameras at SCOTUS, Chicago Law Bans Tech in 1L, Judges Barred from Prediction Markets, Uber Targets Lit Funders, Law Democratized in Times Square & More (07.13.26)<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Now on to this week\u2019s news.<\/p>\n

\n

Highlights from Last Week \u2013 Top Ten Headlines \ud83d\udcf0<\/h3>\n

#1 \u201cTrump Administration Subpoenas Law Firms, Escalating Pressure Campaign.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0The New York Times:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cThe uneasy truce between the administration and the law firms it cut deals with last year has erupted into a pitched legal battle behind closed doors.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>(gift link) and read headline #2 for additional analysis.<\/p>\n

#2 \u201cWhat the Heck is Going On In the ABA Litigation?\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Brad Wendel\u00a0<\/strong>in his\u00a0Legal Ethics Stuff Substack:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cI\u2019ve been scratching my head over reports that the Justice Department has issued subpoenas to the law firms that had previously settled with the administration, either to settle the sanctions imposed by an executive order or to preempt the issuance of an executive order against the firm.\u00a0The\u00a0Times<\/em>\u00a0article suggests it may be some kind of weird three-dimensional chess move. By potentially embarrassing the settling law firms (more than they\u2019ve already been embarrassed, that is), they may put pressure on the ABA to drop its lawsuit seeking to enjoin the administration\u2019s \u2018law firm intimidation policy.\u2019\u00a0\u2026\u00a0I\u2019ve written about<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0the ABA lawsuit, in which they are represented by Susman Godfrey, an extremely high-quality litigation firm that is, let\u2019s just say, not known for backing down in the face of threats. Of course, the decision to press on with litigation or settle is for the client to make, but all indications is that the ABA is also up for the fight. Former ABA President Bill Bay issued an\u00a0admirably clear and strong statement<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0in defense of the rule of law, relatively early in the second Trump administration, before the political winds had begun to shift against some of Trump\u2019s tactics. The government\u2019s motion to dismiss on standing grounds (which I thought had at least some likelihood of success)\u00a0was denied on March 31, 2026<\/a><\/strong>, and so now we\u2019re off to the races on\u00a0discovery<\/a><\/strong>.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#3 \u201cSupreme Court Open to Enforceable Ethics Reform, Justices Tell Congress.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Democracy Docket:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cCongressional Democrats used a pair of budget hearings to implore\u00a0Supreme Court Justices Amy Coney Barrett<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0Elena Kagan<\/strong>\u00a0to support judicial ethics reform and stand up to\u00a0President Donald Trump<\/strong>. Kagan, a\u00a0Barack Obama<\/strong>\u00a0appointee, and Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, appeared before the House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees to discuss the Court\u2019s request for a $16.6 million budget increase to bolster security amid rising death threats against the justices. But Democrats used the occasion to take aim at the Court\u2019s ethical lapses. In recent years, it has been rocked by revelations that some conservative justices have accepted lavish\u00a0gifts<\/a>from wealthy benefactors with interests before the bench.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>and view the testimony broadcast by\u00a0PBS News Hour<\/strong>\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

#4 \u201cThe Trump Administration Wants to Dismantle the International Criminal Court. Can It?\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0From\u00a0The Law Society of New South Wales:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cUS Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote a blistering missive in the Wall Street Journal unveiling plans to dismantle the International Criminal Court (ICC). \u2026 The State Department then unveiled the steps it would take to target the court, which include pressuring allies to resist ICC attempts to prosecute Americans, travel bans on ICC officials, and increased sanctions on the court. \u2026 So, what exactly can the US do to the court, and why do these threats matter?\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#5 \u201cNew Program Examines Lawyers\u2019 Ethical Duty to Defend the Judiciary.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Florida Bar News:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cAs threats against judges continue to rise nationwide, Florida lawyers have an ethical duty not only to maintain civility, but to defend the judiciary, report misconduct, and help educate the public about the rule of law, according to a new free CLE from the Bolch Judicial Institute of Duke Law School with support from Scott Atherton of Atherton Galardi Mullen & Reeder in West Palm Beach. The 42-minute program, \u2018Your Ethical Duty to Defend the Judiciary and Promote Civility<\/a><\/strong>,\u2019 hosted on The Florida Bar\u2019s Henry Latimer Center for Professionalism\u2019s website, explains how lawyers can respond when criticism of judges crosses the line into intimidation, threats, or violence. It also provides practical guidance and resources for attorneys who want to support a fair and impartial judiciary and promote public understanding of the courts.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#6 \u201c20 States Urge Federal Court to Dismiss Trump Administration Suit Over Jeffrey Clark Bar Discipline<\/strong>.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0JURISTNews:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cA coalition of 20 state attorneys general on Friday\u00a0urged<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0a federal judge to dismiss a\u00a0Trump administration lawsuit<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0that seeks to halt\u00a0disciplinary proceedings<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0against\u00a0Jeffrey Clark<\/strong>. Clark faces\u00a0disbarment<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0from his\u00a0attempt to overturn<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0the 2020 presidential election. In their brief, the officials\u00a0argued<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0that regulating state attorneys is a state police power under the\u00a0Tenth Amendment<\/a><\/strong>. They also wrote that no government lawyer is exempt from professional-conduct rules. The coalition pointed to the\u00a0McDade-Murtha Amendment, 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 530B,<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0under which federal attorneys are subject to the ethics rules of their jurisdiction. They then highlighted the\u00a0Younger abstention doctrine<\/a><\/strong>, under which federal courts generally refrain from interfering with pending state proceedings. Finally, the group warned that a ruling for the administration could immunize federal attorneys from discipline, regardless of their conduct.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#7 \u201cA Lawyer Sent $550 to the Wrong Person. It Led to a Two- Year Suspension.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Louisiana Legal Ethics:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cMisdirected payments happen to plenty of people. Maybe you have tried to send money through Zelle or Venmo, picked the wrong \u2018John Smith\u2019 from a dropdown, and suddenly a stranger is $50 richer. It\u2019s annoying. It\u2019s fixable. Banks deal with it constantly.\u00a0Christine Marie Baker,<\/strong>\u00a0a lawyer in Dayton, Ohio, turned that exact situation into a two-year law license suspension and more than $21,000 in legal bills for a total stranger. The case is\u00a0Dayton Bar Assn. v. Baker<\/a><\/strong>, decided July 15, 2026, and it is a case study in how difficult it can be for some lawyers to simply admit to making a mistake.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#8 \u201cJudge Says Trump IRS Lawsuit Was Filed for \u2018Improper Purpose,\u2019 Refers Lawyer for Possible Discipline.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0The Associated Press:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cPresident Donald Trump\u2019s<\/strong>\u00a0lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service\u00a0over his leaked tax returns was filed for an \u2018improper purpose,\u2019 a judge said Monday as she referred one of his lawyers for potential disciplinary action and characterized the $10 billion complaint as an exercise in self-dealing.\u00a0U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams<\/strong>\u00a0accused Trump and his lawyers in a\u00a0scathing ruling<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0of having manipulated the court system when he sued a federal agency under his control, bypassing a requirement that parties in a lawsuit must have adverse interests. \u2026 The judge referred Trump attorney\u00a0Alejandro Brito<\/strong>, who filed the case, for possible disciplinary action before the state bar in Florida and said another lawyer,\u00a0Daniel Epstein<\/strong>, will not be granted permission to file within the Southern District of Florida for up to a year. \u2026The judge also ordered that her ruling be sent to the state bars in New York and the District of Columbia, where ethics complaints have been filed against Blanche and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>. And read headline #9 for one reaction to the ruling.<\/p>\n

#9 \u201cLiberal Law Professor Breaks With Obama Judge Over Trump Lawyer Crackdown: \u2018I Refuse to Teach\u2019 It.\u2019\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Fox News:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cLegal minds across the political spectrum are admonishing an Obama-appointed federal judge for suggesting that bar associations should look into sanctioning lawyers working for the president or the Justice Department, and one liberal constitutional law professor is refusing to teach his students that such a move is acceptable.\u00a0U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams<\/strong>\u00a0formally referred Trump attorney\u00a0Alejandro Brito<\/strong>\u00a0to the Florida Bar in an opinion released Monday and ordered the ruling sent to authorities considering existing disciplinary complaints involving acting\u00a0Attorney General Todd Blanche<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward.\u00a0<\/strong>The disciplinary actions stem from Williams\u2019 ruling in a case involving a settlement that shielded Trump, members of his family and affiliated businesses from certain federal tax audits and claims.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#10 \u201cLawyers Risk Negligence Claims For Failing To Use AI As Legal Ethics Debate Intensifies.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0London Insider:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cLegal professionals face mounting pressure to adopt artificial intelligence tools, with negligence claims now a potential consequence of failing to do so in practice. The question of whether a lawyer can be found negligent for not using AI has moved from theoretical debate to a genuine concern across the legal profession in 2026.\u00a0Renee Knake Jefferson<\/strong>, a prominent legal ethics commentator, has been tracking this emerging issue as part of her ongoing Legal Ethics Roundup series published on Substack.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Get Hired \ud83d\udcbc<\/h3>\n

Did you miss the 500+ job postings from previous weeks? Find them all\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Upcoming Ethics Events & Other Announcements \ud83d\uddd3\ufe0f<\/h3>\n

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

\n

Keep in Touch \ud83d\udcdd<\/h3>\n

Do you have colleagues who care about legal ethics?<\/strong>\u00a0Please share the Roundup with them. I\u2019d love to see our community continue to grow!<\/p>\n

News tips? Announcements? Events?<\/strong>\u00a0A job to post?<\/strong>\u00a0Reading recommendations?<\/strong>\u00a0Email legalethics@substack.com \u2013 but be sure to subscribe first, otherwise the email won\u2019t be delivered.<\/p>\n

\n

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\u00a0Legal Ethics Roundup<\/a>. Find her on X (formerly Twitter) at\u00a0@reneeknake<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky at\u00a0legalethics.bsky.social<\/a>.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Legal Ethics Roundup:\u00a0SCOTUS Justices Testify About Enforceable Ethics, 20 AGs Want Clark Discipline Challenge Dismissed, Law Democratized On LawNext & More<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n

Ed. note<\/u>: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup,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

Happy Monday!<\/p>\n

As promised last week, my\u00a0LawNext Podcast interview<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0with\u00a0Bob Ambrogi<\/strong>\u00a0is now out. From the teaser:<\/p>\n

\n

Martin Luther King famously said, \u201cThe arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.\u201d My guest today quoted his words in her 2024 book,\u00a0Law Democratized: A Blueprint for Solving the Justice Crisis<\/a><\/strong>. But now, two years after that book\u2019s publication \u2014 at a moment when many see the rule of law under strain and speak openly of democratic backsliding \u2014 it is fair to ask: Are we still arcing toward justice?<\/p>\n

That is the question LawNext host Bob Ambrogi put to Renee Knake Jefferson at the start of today\u2019s conversation. \u2026 Renee and Bob talk in depth about the access to justice crisis and what can be done to narrow the justice gap, including why the biggest barrier to legal help may be that people do not even recognize they have a legal problem. They also discuss the promise and peril of AI as a tool for closing the justice gap, why regulatory reform has not produced the domino effect many once predicted, and what lawyers, law schools, regulators and innovators can each do to move the needle.<\/p>\n

Spoiler alert: Jefferson remains a glass-half-full optimist \u2014 and by the end of this conversation, you may be too.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n