Legal Ethics Bonus Content No. 1 - 8 Lawyers Indicted (08.17.23)
Legal Ethics Bonus Content No. 1 - 8 Lawyers Indicted (08.17.23)
The stunning, but not surprising, indictment of eight lawyers together with the former president
Welcome to your inaugural installment of bonus content from Legal Ethics!
In addition to the (FREE!) weekly roundup every Monday morning, I will regularly post bonus content for paid subscribers. This material will offer a deeper-dive into issues touched upon in the weekly roundup and sometimes cover breaking news that just can’t wait until Monday morning, like this week! Here’s a preview of today’s bonus content.
On Tuesday, Law360 senior reporter Jack Karp asked me to comment about the Monday night announcement of the latest indictment involving the former president. He questioned “how usual/unusual it is for attorneys to be indicted in a case like this.” Here’s what I wrote to him:
Eight of the eighteen individuals indicted alongside the former president are lawyers, which is both stunning but not surprising at the same time, given what we already have learned about these lawyers’ lies in the election fraud cases. Some have been sanctioned or had their law license suspended, and some are currently facing discipline. For example, Powell was fined and ordered to take continuing legal education classes by a federal judge in Michigan, Giuliani’s license has been suspended in New York and Washington D.C., Ellis was publicly censured in Colorado, and Eastman is in the midst of a disciplinary trial before the California State Bar.
To be sure, this is not the first time lawyers have been at the heart of a major political scandal, the most famous example of this being Watergate, where we also saw lawyers indicted and convicted of crimes and as many as 18 ultimately were disciplined by state bar authorities. But this is the first time in our nation’s history where eight lawyers have been indicted together with a former president, so in that since it is highly unusual.
It is also a moment of reckoning for the legal profession. Clearly the reforms ushered in post-Watergate, like mandatory ethics and professional responsibility courses for law students required by the American Bar Association and the creation of the Office of Professional Responsibility under President Ford, have not been sufficient to ensure that government lawyers, and lawyers working for government officials, adhere to the highest standards of their professional duties.
Karp followed up, asking: “Since you said this is a moment of reckoning for the legal profession, do you think it's possible that state bars or other authorities might be driven to institute new legal ethics reforms like the ones you mentioned were instituted after Watergate? How likely is that?” Here’s what I wrote back:
I think it’s likely that we will see similar calls for reform and, hopefully, changes. Organizations like The 65 Project are working on reforms, and I could see this as something the newly-announced ABA Task Force for American Democracy would put on its agenda, at least I hope they will.
You can read his full coverage here, which includes excerpts from my thoughts along with commentary and reactions from other legal ethics scholars.
For those who are paid subscribers, please read on to learn more about the eight lawyers indicted on Monday, and the various disciplinary actions they face. For those who are not paid subscribers, the next free installment of the Legal Ethics weekly roundup will post Monday morning. See you then! (If you need a comp subscription, let me know at legalethics@substack.com - no questions asked. Otherwise, thank you for reading and supporting this work!)