Pennsylvania Bar Dismisses 3rd Circuit Appeal in Rule 8.4(g) Challenge

The bar will presumably try again to draft a constitutional version of the ABA Model Rule

In December, a federal district court declared unconstitutional Pennsylvania's version of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). The judge reiterated points that Eugene Volokh and I have been making for years: this rule may be well intentioned, but it violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

In January, the Pennsylvania Bar filed a notice of appeal to the Third Circuit. But yesterday, the Bar surrendered. It voluntarily dismissed the appeal. Congratulations to Adam Schulman, Ted Frank, and the other lawyers at the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute for their victory.

Going forward, the Pennsylvania Bar will presumably try to draft a constitutional version of the rule. Other states considering ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) should take note, and proceed in a different direction.

Comments

[DaivdBehar]

Cancel all woke agencies. Cancel the lawyer profession. No one who has passed 1L should sit on a bench, hold a legislative seat, nor occupy a responsible policy position in the executive. A constitutional amendment would likely get enacted because the voter hates this profession so much.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I know why they are doing it, but in the era of cancel culture, you'd think the Bar Assn wouldn't bother with formal rules when woke lynch mobs will do the job quicker & sooner.

[Ed Grinberg]

Woke lynch mobs today, bar discipline tomorrow, criminal penalties the day after. Progress!

[DaivdBehar]

Cancel the Bar and Disciplinary Counsel. They are criminal enterprises. They are a cartel, self dealing higher prices for legal services. FBI investigations and mass arrests of this Mafia are appropriate.

[AtR]

Every now and again, the good guys win. Well done.