In June 2021, the Superior Court of Connecticut approved amendments to Connecticut Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4, which defines professional misconduct. The amendments expanded the definition of misconduct in subsection (7) to include engaging in "conduct that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is harassment or discrimination...in conduct related to the practice of law" based on a long list of protected characteristics including "race, color, ancestry, sex, pregnancy, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, status as a veteran, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or marital status".
In November 2021, Mario Cerame and Timothy C. Moynahan, two Connecticut lawyers who regularly presented on issues potentially implicated by the new rule, brought suit, alleging the rule as amended violated their First and Fourteenth Amendments. They argued the rule was impermissibly overbroad and chilled lawful speech in so far as it was unclear what speech may be interpreted to be violative of the rule. The district court dismissed the suit for lack of standing. Cerame and Moynahan appealed to the Second Circuit, which, in December 2024 vacated the district court's decision, ruling they did have standing and remanding for further proceedings.
Join us for a litigation update for this interesting case implicating professional responsibility, ABA model rules, and free speech with Margaret Little of NCLA, which represents Cerame and Moynahan.
Featuring:
Margaret A. Little, Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
(Moderator) Prof. Josh Blackman, Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law Houston
In November 2021, Mario Cerame and Timothy C. Moynahan, two Connecticut lawyers who regularly presented on issues potentially implicated by the new rule, brought suit, alleging the rule as amended violated their First and Fourteenth Amendments. They argued the rule was impermissibly overbroad and chilled lawful speech in so far as it was unclear what speech may be interpreted to be violative of the rule. The district court dismissed the suit for lack of standing. Cerame and Moynahan appealed to the Second Circuit, which, in December 2024 vacated the district court's decision, ruling they did have standing and remanding for further proceedings.
Join us for a litigation update for this interesting case implicating professional responsibility, ABA model rules, and free speech with Margaret Little of NCLA, which represents Cerame and Moynahan.
Featuring:
Margaret A. Little, Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
(Moderator) Prof. Josh Blackman, Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law Houston