Ed. note: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup, here.
Welcome to what captivates, haunts, inspires, and surprises me every week in the world of legal ethics.
Happy Monday!
As promised last week, my LawNext Podcast interview with Bob Ambrogi is now out. From the teaser:
Martin Luther King famously said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” My guest today quoted his words in her 2024 book, Law Democratized: A Blueprint for Solving the Justice Crisis. But now, two years after that book’s publication — at a moment when many see the rule of law under strain and speak openly of democratic backsliding — it is fair to ask: Are we still arcing toward justice?
That is the question LawNext host Bob Ambrogi put to Renee Knake Jefferson at the start of today’s conversation. … 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.
Spoiler alert: Jefferson remains a glass-half-full optimist — and by the end of this conversation, you may be too.
I hope you’ll give it a listen.
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: LER No. 140 – 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)
Now on to this week’s news.
Highlights from Last Week – Top Ten Headlines 📰
#1 “Trump Administration Subpoenas Law Firms, Escalating Pressure Campaign.” From The New York Times: “The 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.” Read more here (gift link) and read headline #2 for additional analysis.
#2 “What the Heck is Going On In the ABA Litigation?” From Brad Wendel in his Legal Ethics Stuff Substack: “I’ve 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. The Times article suggests it may be some kind of weird three-dimensional chess move. By potentially embarrassing the settling law firms (more than they’ve already been embarrassed, that is), they may put pressure on the ABA to drop its lawsuit seeking to enjoin the administration’s ‘law firm intimidation policy.’ … I’ve written about the ABA lawsuit, in which they are represented by Susman Godfrey, an extremely high-quality litigation firm that is, let’s 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 admirably clear and strong statement in 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’s tactics. The government’s motion to dismiss on standing grounds (which I thought had at least some likelihood of success) was denied on March 31, 2026, and so now we’re off to the races on discovery.” Read more here.
#3 “Supreme Court Open to Enforceable Ethics Reform, Justices Tell Congress.” From Democracy Docket: “Congressional Democrats used a pair of budget hearings to implore Supreme Court Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan to support judicial ethics reform and stand up to President Donald Trump. Kagan, a Barack Obama appointee, and Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, appeared before the House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees to discuss the Court’s 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’s ethical lapses. In recent years, it has been rocked by revelations that some conservative justices have accepted lavish giftsfrom wealthy benefactors with interests before the bench.” Read more here and view the testimony broadcast by PBS News Hour here.
#4 “The Trump Administration Wants to Dismantle the International Criminal Court. Can It?” From The Law Society of New South Wales: “US Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote a blistering missive in the Wall Street Journal unveiling plans to dismantle the International Criminal Court (ICC). … 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. … So, what exactly can the US do to the court, and why do these threats matter?” Read more here.
#5 “New Program Examines Lawyers’ Ethical Duty to Defend the Judiciary.” From Florida Bar News: “As 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, ‘Your Ethical Duty to Defend the Judiciary and Promote Civility,’ hosted on The Florida Bar’s Henry Latimer Center for Professionalism’s 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.” Read more here.
#6 “20 States Urge Federal Court to Dismiss Trump Administration Suit Over Jeffrey Clark Bar Discipline.” From JURISTNews: “A coalition of 20 state attorneys general on Friday urged a federal judge to dismiss a Trump administration lawsuit that seeks to halt disciplinary proceedings against Jeffrey Clark. Clark faces disbarment from his attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election. In their brief, the officials argued that regulating state attorneys is a state police power under the Tenth Amendment. They also wrote that no government lawyer is exempt from professional-conduct rules. The coalition pointed to the McDade-Murtha Amendment, 28 U.S.C. § 530B, under which federal attorneys are subject to the ethics rules of their jurisdiction. They then highlighted the Younger abstention doctrine, 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.” Read more here.
#7 “A Lawyer Sent $550 to the Wrong Person. It Led to a Two- Year Suspension.” From Louisiana Legal Ethics: “Misdirected payments happen to plenty of people. Maybe you have tried to send money through Zelle or Venmo, picked the wrong ‘John Smith’ from a dropdown, and suddenly a stranger is $50 richer. It’s annoying. It’s fixable. Banks deal with it constantly. Christine Marie Baker, a 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 Dayton Bar Assn. v. Baker, 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.” Read more here.
#8 “Judge Says Trump IRS Lawsuit Was Filed for ‘Improper Purpose,’ Refers Lawyer for Possible Discipline.” From The Associated Press: “President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over his leaked tax returns was filed for an ‘improper purpose,’ 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. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams accused Trump and his lawyers in a scathing ruling of 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. … The judge referred Trump attorney Alejandro Brito, who filed the case, for possible disciplinary action before the state bar in Florida and said another lawyer, Daniel Epstein, will not be granted permission to file within the Southern District of Florida for up to a year. …The 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.” Read more here. And read headline #9 for one reaction to the ruling.
#9 “Liberal Law Professor Breaks With Obama Judge Over Trump Lawyer Crackdown: ‘I Refuse to Teach’ It.’” From Fox News: “Legal 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. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams formally referred Trump attorney Alejandro Brito to the Florida Bar in an opinion released Monday and ordered the ruling sent to authorities considering existing disciplinary complaints involving acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward. The disciplinary actions stem from Williams’ ruling in a case involving a settlement that shielded Trump, members of his family and affiliated businesses from certain federal tax audits and claims.” Read more here.
#10 “Lawyers Risk Negligence Claims For Failing To Use AI As Legal Ethics Debate Intensifies.” From London Insider: “Legal 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. Renee Knake Jefferson, a prominent legal ethics commentator, has been tracking this emerging issue as part of her ongoing Legal Ethics Roundup series published on Substack.” Read more here.
Get Hired 💼
Did you miss the 500+ job postings from previous weeks? Find them all here.
Upcoming Ethics Events & Other Announcements 🗓️
Did you miss an announcement from previous weeks? Find them all here.
Keep in Touch 📝
Do you have colleagues who care about legal ethics? Please share the Roundup with them. I’d love to see our community continue to grow!
News tips? Announcements? Events? A job to post? Reading recommendations? Email legalethics@substack.com – but be sure to subscribe first, otherwise the email won’t be delivered.
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 Legal Ethics Roundup. Find her on X (formerly Twitter) at @reneeknake or Bluesky at legalethics.bsky.social.
The post Legal Ethics Roundup: SCOTUS Justices Testify About Enforceable Ethics, 20 AGs Want Clark Discipline Challenge Dismissed, Law Democratized On LawNext & More appeared first on Above the Law.
from Above the Law https://ift.tt/LHU3YGq
via IFTTT