Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons^™

The Virginia Company To Chick-Fil-A: Christian Business In America, 1600–2000, Joseph P. Slaughter

Seattle University Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. is one of its most controversial in recent history. Burwell’s narrow 5–4 ruling states that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 applies to closely held, for-profit corporations seeking religious exemptions to the Affordable Care Act. As a result, the Burwell decision thrust Hobby Lobby, the national craft chain established by the conservative evangelical Green family of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, onto the national stage. Firms like Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-A, however, reject the conventional wisdom Justice Ginsburg explained in Burwell and instead embrace an approach to business with …

Introductory Remarks, Michael Rogers, Hannah Hamley, Rayshaun D. Williams

Seattle University Law Review

Introductory Remarks.

Marissa Jackson Sow’S “Whiteness As Contract”, Marissa Jackson Sow

Seattle University Law Review

Marissa Jackson Sow’s “Whiteness as Contract.”

Closing Remarks, Dontay Proctor-Mills

Seattle University Law Review

Closing Remarks.

Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky

Seattle University Law Review

This Article explores what we coin “rock and hard place” (RHP) arguments in the law, and it aims to motivate mission-driven plaintiffs to seek out such arguments in their cases. The RHP argument structure helps plaintiffs win cases even when the court views that outcome as unfavorable.

We begin by dissecting RHP dilemmas that have long existed in the American legal system. As Part I reveals, prosecutors and law enforcement officials have often taken advantage of RHP dilemmas and used them as a tool to persuade criminal defendants to forfeit their constitutional rights, confess, or give up the chance to …

The Search For Clarity In An Attorney’S Duty To Google, Michael Murphy

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Third Party And Appointed Monitorships, Veronica Root Martinez

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter outlines the history and use of monitors in various contexts, beginning with the original conception of a court-appointed monitor and ending with the more recent development of the public relations and modern-day court-ordered monitor. It next discusses how the specific type of monitorship alters the duties and confidentiality expectations of the parties to the monitorship in both formal and informal ways. Next, it analyzes the sparse regulation of monitorships, suggesting that reputation may currently be the most effective limit on monitor overreach and capture. Finally, it ends by proposing two areas for scholarly focus going forward: (1) mechanisms …

The Role Of Norms In Modern-Day Government Ethics, Veronica Root Martinez

Faculty Scholarship

Many scholars, policymakers, advocacy groups, members of the media, and citizens-at-large are lamenting the perceived decrease in adherence to norms and ethics by certain government officials over the past few years. Informal mechanisms—whether they be norms, ethics, customs, or a “gentleman’s word”—have long been relied upon to ensure certain standards of behavior within all aspects of society. The American government is no exception. From America’s founding, the rule of law created the backstop for its governmental processes, but the virtue of its leaders remained a constant component of its success. To be fair, the country has seen more than its …

Lawyer Ethics For Innovation, Renee K. Jefferson

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

The Professionalization Of Compliance: Its Progress, Impediments, And Outcomes, James A. Fanto

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

The Rising Popularity Of The Right To Counsel In Eviction Cases: Rationales Supporting It And Legislation Providing It, Natalie D. Fulk

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Reforming The Eitc And Ctc To Provide Greater Income Stability — An Alternative To Ubi, Jacqueline Heafey

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Conscience Leave, Andrew K. Jennings

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Taking A Positive Approach To Government Ethics, Ann B. Ching

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Reforming The Office Of Legal Counsel, Barry Sullivan

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Truthfulness And The Rule Of Law, W. Bradley Wendel

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Quid Pro No? The Bribery Statute’S Failure To Capture The “Official Acts” Of High-Ranking Public Officials, Lauren N. Vaca

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

The Guantanamo Military Commission: The Mca 2009 As A Violation Of International Law, Mary-Kate Poulin

Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Playing By The Rule: How Aba Model Rule 8.4(G) Can Regulate Jury Exclusion, Anna Offit

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Discrimination during voir dire remains a critical impediment to empaneling juries that reflect the diversity of the United States. While various solutions have been proposed, scholars have largely overlooked ethics rules as an instrument for preventing discriminatory behavior during jury selection. Focusing on the ABA Model Rule 8.4(g), which regulates professional misconduct, this article argues that ethics rules can, under certain conditions, offer an effective deterrent to exclusionary practices among legal actors. Part I examines the specific history, evolution, and application of revised ABA Model Rule 8.4(g). Part II delves into the ways that ethics rules in general, despite their …

Catching Unfitness, Jon J. Lee

Faculty Articles

Bias and prejudice are pervasive in the legal profession. Yet only relatively recently has there been a recognition among those in the profession that it is imperative to sanction attorneys who manifest bias and prejudice through harassment and discriminatory acts. Even then, it took decades for the ABA to adopt Model Rule 8.4(g) to proscribe such misconduct, and its reception by states has been lukewarm at best to antagonistic at worst. This recent controversy leads to an even more fundamental question: How can the legal profession effectively regulate the multitude of ways in which an attorney may commit misconduct, given …