News & Insights

This month’s column discusses the California trend, which has arrived in Arizona, that raises questions about the propriety of using the Rules of Professional Conduct to punish lawyer speech unconnected to judicial proceedings and whether licensure is being used as “politics by other means” to silence politically dissident lawyers. Read about various cases that raise questions about how ER 8.4(c) has jumped the tracks from prohibiting deceptive conduct and is morphing into a license for the judiciary to regulate the content of speech by conditioning a lawyer’s right to practice law on the expression of only those political statements that are approved by the judiciary, and provides a reminder of what the Rules of Professional Conduct are intended for.

This month’s column discusses a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of New Mexico in an attorney disciplinary proceeding. Learn how that ruling highlighted a split in authority over the standard for determining whether a lawyer’s statements about a judge’s qualifications or integrity are sanctionable.