Legal Ethics Roundup: TEDLaw Launch, Beautiful Bill Impact, Trump Appeals EO Loss, Fed Judge = Public Official Defamation, Judge Salas – Rule of Law & More

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 First Monday!

Hello from Washington DC, where we celebrated the 4th of July and our wedding anniversary or, as we call it, our own “Loving” day. (For more on that, see here – gift link.) We caught Beyoncé’s holiday performance on Friday, and it lived up to all of the strong reviews. From the New York Times:

Beyoncé’s Cowboy Carter Tour remixes American history, and her own. The superstar’s new stage show turns reclamation, personal and musical, into joyful extravaganza. … Reverence was just one of her postures, but not one she wore for long. At the end of the show, a huge bust of the Statue of Liberty appeared onstage with a bandanna covering its mouth, as if protecting itself. One video sketch found a giant Beyoncé stomping past the White House — wonder who’s hanging out in there? — then drawing a wink from the Lincoln Memorial.

Read more here (gift link).

It was a busy week leading up to the holiday. I submitted comments in response to the Supreme Court of Texas’s order requesting input about whether to maintain ABA accreditation for Texas law schools or pursue alternatives. Short version: keep ABA accreditation but also authorize licensed paraprofessionals and community justice workers, as recommended by the Texas Access to Justice Commission’s Working Group on Access to Legal Services. Read my full statement here. (Full disclosure – I served on the Working Group and I’m slated for election to the ABA accrediting body, the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, in August.)

I also was thrilled to join the first meeting of the TEDLaw Faculty Advisory Council. Yes, you read that right. TED is bringing its incredible platform for inspiring and sharing knowledge to legal education. The effort is spearheaded by TED Conferences General Counsel Nishat Ruiter. Learn more here. Over a decade ago, a few of us at Michigan State University organized a series of TED-like events around the globe in London, NYC, Dubai, and Silicon Valley under the name ReInvent Law. Those conferences helped infuse technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship into law school programs across the country. (For more on that history, download my chapter “The ReInvent Law Archive” from the book Legal Design: Dignifying People in Legal Systems (Cambridge University Press 2024) or scroll through these memories captured at LawSites). I can’t wait to see how Nishat and her TED team transform teaching across the law school curriculum. Here’s an introduction to her vision for TEDLaw and a preview of the TEDLaw Curriculum. Stay tuned for more information about a TEDLaw Conference coming in 2026. And if you want to get involved now, take a few moments to provide feedback in this survey.

---

Now, let’s get started with the headlines. Don’t forget to keep scrolling down to the very end — on the first Monday of each month, you get a longer version of the Roundup with reading recommendations, job postings, events, and other features. Enjoy!

Highlights from Last Week – Top Ten Headlines

#1 “Trump Administration Presses On With Fight to Enforce Law-Firm Sanctions.” From the Wall Street Journal: “The Trump administration isn’t giving up its legal fight to enforce punishing sanctions against law firms following a string of resounding defeats in court. The Justice Department on Monday filed notice that it was appealing a ruling that struck down an executive order against Perkins Coie, one of the first law firms to be targeted by a sweeping measure that directed agencies to remove access to federal buildings and strip its clients of government contracts. Judge Beryl Howell, a Barack Obama-appointee, ruled in May that the order was unconstitutional. She is one of four judges who have struck down similar executive orders targeting firms that President Trump perceived as being at odds with his administration, politics or him personally. The latest came on Friday from Judge Loren AliKhan, who said an order against Susman Godfrey was plagued by ‘grave constitutional violations.’” Read more here.

#2 “‘We Have to Speak Up for Justice:’ Judges from the US and Venezuela Defend the Rule of Law.” From the CNN show Amanpour, anchor Bianna Golodryga interviewed U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, whose son was murdered in an attack targeting her, and Salas observed: “You know, a lot of people talk about this being political. It is not political to defend the rule of law. In fact, there is a Canon that guides our judicial ethics, Canon 4. And the commentary to Canon 4 is very clear. And I want to just paraphrase it, but it says that judges may express opposition to the persecution of judges or lawyers anywhere in the world if the judge has ascertained, after reasonable inquiry, that the persecution is occasioned by conflict, emphasis on conflict, between the persecuted lawyer or judge, and the policies or practices of the relevant government. That was written when judges were traveling internationally to speak. I don’t think that commentary was written to be used necessarily in the United States of America, but I do think it is a Canon that judges should look to and think about, because there is at least reasonable inquiry now and proof that we are under attack, either attacks by known individuals or attacks by those that hide in the shadows and send us death threats to our chambers and send us pizzas to our homes to try to inflict fear.” Read more of the transcript here. Watch the interview here.

#3 Financial Consequences for Lawyers and Law Students Under the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” Two headlines for #3. First, from the Daily Journal: “Litigation Funding Dodges Tax Bullet in Big Beautiful Bill. A controversial excise tax on litigation funding proceeds — once feared by funders and lawyers alike — has been left out of the Senate’s final tax bill for now, but with strong industry backing and future legislative interest, it may yet return in another form.” Read more here. Second, from Forbes: “Unprecedented Student Loan Overhaul In ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ Passes House, Heads To Trump. … The bill eliminates the Graduate PLUS program, a federal student loan option that helps fund attendance at graduate and professional schools. Increased Stafford loan borrowing limits would partially offset the elimination of this option, but with lifetime caps of $100,000 for graduate students and $200,000 for professional students, it may simply not be enough to cover the full cost of expensive advanced degrees. Critics have argued that some prospective students may turn to riskier private student loans, or decide against going to medical or law school altogether, which would make existing shortages in high-need areas … even worse.” Read more here.

#4 “Federal Judges are Public Officials for Defamation Purposes, Judge Rules.” From Reuters: “Federal judges are public officials who must meet a higher bar to sue individuals for defamation, a federal judge concluded as he dismissed a lawsuit by one of his counterparts against onetime members of a Florida condo association’s board. U.S. District Judge Roy Altman in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, reached that conclusion in an amended opinion released Monday that rejected claims by Senior U.S. District Judge Frederic Block. The Brooklyn-based judge had sued two former condo association board members, alleging they tried to destroy his reputation by falsely accusing him of computer hacking during a years-long feud over renovations.” Read more here.

#5 Nominee for New Jersey’s Permanent U.S. Attorney Faces Ethics Investigations. Two headlines for #7. First, from the New York Times: “President Trump on Tuesday nominated Alina Habba, his former campaign spokeswoman and personal lawyer, to be New Jersey’s U.S. attorney for the next four years, a move that would remove her interim status. In doing so, Mr. Trump endorsed a loyal supporter with little prosecutorial experience to continue leading one of the country’s top law enforcement offices. … Ms. Habba has bucked the traditionally nonpartisan approach of U.S. attorneys. She has aggressively carried out Mr. Trump’s wish to use the Justice Department to target his enemies, including Democratic elected officials who oppose the president’s immigration agenda.” Read more here (gift link). Second, from NOTUS: “Alina Habba, once President Donald Trump’s personal attorney and now the interim U.S. attorney for New Jersey, has quietly been under investigation by the state’s professional regulators for more than a year — putting her license to practice law at risk. NOTUS obtained documents detailing the investigation, which since January 2024 has been probing what happened when a young waitress at Trump’s Bedminster golf club tried to sue over sexual harassment by her manager.” Read more here.

#6 “’We Could Not Remain Silent’: The Members of the Legal Profession Pursuing Ethics Investigation for AG Pam Bondi.” An op-ed from Abbe Smith (Georgetown) and Ellen Yaroshefsky (Hofstra) in the New York Law Journal: “Since Donald Trump’s return to office, every agency tasked with ethical oversight of the executive branch, including the Office of Government Ethics, the Office of Special Counsel, and the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility has been shut down or rendered feeble. This rapid descent into an ethics-free regulatory environment happened in less than five months. It is against this backdrop that, last month, three civil society groups and 70 prominent lawyers, law professors, and judges filed a complaint with the Florida Bar Association, urging it to investigate U.S. Attorney General and Florida Bar member Pam Bondi for her misuse of the concept of ‘zealous advocacy’ to pursue the Trump Administration’s objectives. We helped draft this complaint because we could not remain silent while Bondi violated ethical obligations fundamental to the legal profession by repeatedly firing Justice Department lawyers, or giving them no choice but to resign, when those lawyers refused to act unethically.” Read more here.

#7 “Ex-Defender Faces Skeptical Judges in Seeking Case’s Revival.” From Bloomberg Law: “An appeals court seemed skeptical of a former federal public defender’s challenge to the judiciary’s procedures for handling misconduct complaints. Caryn Strickland, who alleged that she was harassed by her supervisor at the Western District of North Carolina’s federal defender’s office, argued to the court on Monday that her case involves the right of other judiciary employees to be in a workplace free from harassment.” Read more here.

#8 Federal Judges Are, Too Often, ‘Above the Law.’ We Can Stop It.” An op-ed from Aliza Shatzman (Legal Accountability Project) in the Philadelphia Inquirer: “As the lawyer leading the charge against workplace misconduct in the courts, I’m accustomed to criticizing imperious federal judges who are above the law. I don’t mean they act like they are above the law — they are often literally above the laws they interpret. Some routinely engage in workplace misconduct that would otherwise be illegal. But it’s not, because the tens of thousands of law clerks and other employees who work for federal judges lack even basic protections against discrimination. … Judiciary employees support the daily functioning of our courts and ensure justice for those who appear before the courts, all while lacking justice and workplace protections themselves. Judges refer to clerks as ‘idiots,’ treat them like personal assistants rather than esteemed law graduates, and fire them for no reason. And even when judges display worrisome signs they are no longer able to serve, they’re protected by the cloak of life tenure, and pressure staff to conceal their shortcomings.” Read more here. (Full disclosure: I am a member of the Legal Accountability Project’s Advisory Board).

#9 “ABA’s Plan to Double Hands-On Credits for Law Students is Rife With Flaws, Deans Say.” From Reuters: “An American Bar Association proposal to double the hands-on coursework credits for law students is facing sharp criticism from some legal educators as being too costly, too constraining, and an overreach in controlling curriculum. Under the proposed change to the ABA’s law school accreditation standards, the number of credits for hands-on classes, known as experiential learning, that students must take would increase to 12 from the current six. Students would need to earn at least three of those credits in a clinic or a field placement.” Read more here.

#10 “Fordham Law Helps Launch Global Initiative on the Legal Profession.” From a Fordham Law Press Release: “In April, Fordham Law, represented by Professor Bruce Green, joined six leading law schools at the inaugural meeting of the Global Network of Centers on the Legal Profession, a new global organization of law school centers focused on examining the legal profession, legal education, and legal ethics. Green, director of Fordham Law’s Stein Center for Law and Ethics, was joined by faculty members from the Harvard Law School Center on the Legal Profession, the LawAhead Center at IE Law School, the Bucerius Center on the Legal Profession, Georgetown University, King’s College London, and Tilburg University, for the day-long session at IE University in Madrid, Spain. The goal of the Global Network of Centers on the Legal Profession is to ‘foster collaborative projects among institutions dedicated to research, dialogue, and training in the legal field,’ as well as promoting ‘future exchanges and collaborations regarding developments in the legal profession internationally.’” Read more here. (Side note: Efforts like this are part of the agenda I’ve called for in my recently-published Cardozo Law Review article “Ethics Accountability: The Next Era for Lawyers and Judges.” Kudos to Fordham and the others leading on this front.)

---

Recommended Reading

Recommendation #1: “How a Rule 23(b)(2) Class Action Could Save Law Firms From Trump” by Nora Freeman Engstrom (Stanford), Jonah Gelbach (Berkeley), and David Marcus (UCLA). From the abstract:

Donald Trump has issued numerous Executive Orders attacking leading law firms, threatening to destroy their relationships with clients. These Executive Orders are clearly unlawful. Yet, several targeted firms have surrendered without a fight, while several others even surrendered preemptively, before Trump took any action against them. As stunning as this acquiescence to President Trump’s abuse of power is, there’s a simple economic logic to it, which can be understood via the dynamics of the classic Prisoners’ Dilemma. All law firms would be better off if no firm capitulated. But a firm can reap short-term individual benefits by capitulating. And, for a host of reasons, mustering effective collective action, where all firms stand shoulder-to-shoulder against Trump, is wickedly difficult. How can firms overcome this collective action problem? The answer: Rule 23(b)(2). Indeed, the Rule 23(b)(2) class action device was created precisely to solve the type of collective action problem that Trump’s onslaught has created. In this short Essay, we outline how a Rule 23(b)(2) class action for injunctive relief could be brought on behalf of all law firms in Trump’s crosshairs, defend it as the right strategy, and explain why both precedent and history support its use.

Download from SSRN here.

Recommendation #2: “Kenneth Chesebro and the Ethics of Election Subversion” by Sung Hui Kim (UCLA). From the abstract:

This Article examines the role of attorney Kenneth Chesebro in orchestrating the “fake electors plot” following the 2020 U.S. presidential election. It traces Chesebro’s transformation from a Harvard-educated lawyer with Democratic ties to a key architect of Donald Trump’s post-election strategy to derail the transfer of power to Joseph Biden. Part I provides a detailed chronology of Chesebro’s activities between November 2020 and January 2021, revealing how his legal advice evolved from preserving legal rights in Wisconsin to a coordinated plan to impanel alternate electors across multiple battleground states as a pretext for the Vice President to intervene unilaterally in the Congressional certification of the national election on January 6. Part II analyzes the professional discipline case against Chesebro under Model Rule 8.4(c). It examines the principal elements of Chesebro’s strategy and argues that his conduct appears to have involved dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, warranting professional discipline. Part III interrogates Chesebro’s moral culpability, contending that his actions represent not merely a violation of professional conduct rules but a profound betrayal of public trust and democratic principles. This Article concludes that Chesebro’s moral culpability transcends his violations of the professional conduct rules. By pursuing increasingly aggressive strategies to overturn Biden’s legitimate victory without evidence of outcome-changing fraud, by offering a would-be autocrat with a blueprint for how to subvert the collective will of the voters in contravention of the U.S. Constitution, federal and state laws, and by using his legal expertise to peddle implausible theories designed to exploit procedural leverage to advance a naked power grab, he demonstrated a mind-blowing willingness to undermine democracy itself. Chesebro betrayed the public trust in ways that existing professional conduct rules, which lack explicit duties to preserve democracy, cannot adequately capture or address.

Read the full article here. (And revisit last week’s LER for news of Chesebro’s DC disbarment.)

Recommendation #3: “The Supreme Court’s Specious Code of Conduct” by James Sample (Hofstra). From the abstract:

This Article, along with a prior article, The Supreme Court and the Limits of Human Impartiality, publishedin the Hofstra Law Review, initially developed out of written and spoken testimony about Supreme Court ethics, transparency, and disclosure before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, where Senator Sheldon Whitehouse proposed the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act to impose and enforce a code of ethics for the Supreme Court. … This hearing came in the wake of an investigative report by ProPublica that raised concerns about Justice Clarence Thomas’s potential failure to meet financial disclosure requirements after he received trips and other valuable items from Republican billionaire donor Harlan Crow. … This Article seeks to build on the prior one, particularly with an eye towards critiquing the political, judicial, and legal ramifications of the Court’s unfortunately ersatz Code.

Read the full article here.

Recommendation #4: “Why Courts Should Not Discipline Trump’s Lawyers” by Rebecca Roiphe (New York Law School). From the abstract:

After the first Trump administration, there were multiple coordinated efforts to discipline lawyers in highly charged political cases. For example, a California bar court recommended that John Eastman be disbarred. Eastman helped craft the legal argument that then-Vice President Mike Pence had the right to delay or decline to certify the election results, and the disciplinary case concluded that he lied publicly, in his memos to his client and Pence, and to courts. This Article draws on Eastman’s case to argue that disciplinary charges in politically charged cases are often unconstitutional and even when they are not, they are unwise and counterproductive because they chill useful advocacy and threaten democratic values.

Read the full article here.

Recommendation #5: “Are There Causes and Clients Lawyers Should Not Represent?” by Richard Abel (UCLA). From the abstract:

Lawyers have long asserted that they are not morally responsible for the clients and causes they represent. Such irresponsibility is predicated on a political philosophy of liberal pluralism, which maintains that because all human preferences are legitimate, the only way to resolve differences is through agreed processes – of which the legal system is preeminent. We have reached a conjuncture, however, where this posture is no longer acceptable. Climate change, caused by human agency, threatens all life on earth. Autocrats in many countries seek to destroy democracy. And growing inequalities of wealth and income render representative democracy an empty charade. Because lawyers are centrally implicated in each of these existential threats, they must confront their own moral responsibility.

Read the full article here. And read responses from Robert Barrington, Guy Beringer, Georgia Garrod, Ole Hammerslev, Brad Wendel, and Iris van Domselaar here.

---

Legal Ethics Trivia

From the Texas Center for Legal Ethics, here’s the question of the month: “Are law firm websites considered ‘advertisements’?” Test yourself at this website where you can read a short hypothetical, select an answer, and see your results. So far, out of 85 responses, 23% have gotten it right. Will you?

---

Get Hired

Did you miss the 150+ job postings from previous weeks? Find them all here.

• Assistant Ethics Counsel, North Carolina State Bar — Raleigh, NC/Hybrid. From the posting: “The North Carolina State Bar is hiring a licensed North Carolina attorney to serve as assistant ethics counsel. This is a unique opportunity to work at the intersection of legal ethics, public service, and legal education. In this role, you’ll provide guidance to attorneys on ethics issues, support the Ethics Committee, and help shape the ethical landscape of the legal profession in North Carolina by contributing to the development of formal ethics opinions and amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct. You’ll also deliver CLE presentations, conduct legal research, and support the State Bar’s efforts in protecting the public through the regulation of the legal profession.” Learn more and apply here.
• Assistant Ethics Counsel, Virginia State Bar — Richmond, VA. From the posting: “The Virginia State Bar has an immediate opening for an experienced attorney to work as an Assistant Ethics Counsel. The VSB Ethics department attorneys advise bar members, judges, and out-of-state attorneys through the ethics hotline on a variety of professional regulation issues, including legal ethics, lawyer advertising, and unauthorized practice of law. They also develop and present CLEs, interpret statutes and rules relating to legal ethics, draft legal ethics opinions and rule amendments, and provide counsel and support to assigned committees, task forces and work groups.” Learn more and apply here.
• Associate Director and Counsel, Global Compliance Investigations, Pratt & Whitney — East Hartford, CT/Hybrid. Responsibilities include: “Investigating allegations of potential violations of ethics and compliance laws/policies and/or certain global security matters, including coordination of matters with global ethics & compliance functions; acting as compliance counsel, supporting non-attorney investigators in ethics and compliance investigations, including assisting in responding to governmental subpoenas and managing document collection, custodian and record identification and responsiveness reviews.” Learn more and apply here.
• Conflicts Attorney, Wilson Elser LLP — Washington, DC/Remote. From the posting: “We are seeking a detail-oriented and analytical Conflicts Attorney to join our General Counsel’s office. This individual will be responsible for identifying, analyzing, and resolving potential legal and business conflicts of interest related to new business intake, lateral attorney hiring, and firm operations. The ideal candidate will bring a strong understanding of legal ethics and professional responsibility rules, along with excellent judgment and communication skills.” Learn more and apply here.
• Ethics Attorney/Sr. Associate/Associate, Cha Law Ethics — Remote (with CA Bar License). From the posting: “We are seeking a Senior Ethics Attorney to join our fully remote team. This role involves representing attorneys and law students in various legal ethics matters, including State Bar investigations, legal malpractice defence, reinstatements, and admissions. The ideal candidate will have a strong background in legal ethics, excellent communication skills, and the ability to work independently in a remote setting.” Learn more and apply here.
• Senior Conflicts Counsel Manager, Dinsmore LLP — Cincinnati, OH. From the posting: “Dinsmore is seeking a full-time Senior Conflicts Counsel Manager to lead Dinsmore’s conflicts attorney group in identifying and resolving ethical and business conflicts for the firm’s new clients and matters as well as assisting in conflict clearance and client and matter intake for lateral attorneys. The Senior Conflicts Counsel Manager also researches and advises the firm’s lawyers on risk management issues and the rules of professional conduct in the states in which Dinsmore operates. The person in this role will also help oversee the management of the firm’s conflicts database and assist in other key conflicts and ethical issues for the firm.” Learn more and apply here.
• Senior In-House Lawyer – Conflicts A &O Shearman — New York City/Hybrid. From the posting: “The role of the Senior In House Lawyer – Conflicts is to be a trusted adviser to the business, providing high quality, proactive business-focused support and solutions to colleagues on a variety of commercial and complex regulatory issues, focused mainly on conflicts of interest and other business acceptance matters. It requires an individual with the ability to develop strong working relationships to be a “go to” and accessible person for queries and concerns from around the world. These queries come from stakeholders of all levels from business teams and fee earners, including practice group heads and senior management. The Senior In House Lawyer – Conflicts is given a high level of autonomy and expected to take responsibility for identifying solutions and driving them forward. In addition, the Senior In House Lawyer – Conflicts will participate in strategic projects and be part of the horizon-scanning team, inputting into the strategic direction of the firm’s regulation.” Learn more and apply here.

Upcoming Ethics Events & Other Announcements

Did you miss an announcement from previous weeks? Find them all here.

2025

• Help TED Shape the Future of Legal Education. From TED: “Known for spreading ideas that spark change, TED is now applying its global platform, network of changemakers, and educational innovation to the legal field—developing a new learning tool that brings together TED Talks, real-world insights from GCs and practitioners, and research-based frameworks to help legal education evolve. Our focus is on five essential impact areas: critical thinking, AI adaptability, cross-cultural and generational fluency, collaborative leadership, and creative problem-solving. This isn’t about replacing traditional legal instruction—it’s about complementing it with human-centered, story-driven tools that reflect the world lawyers are entering. We’re asking GCs, lawyers, and legal practitioners around the world to share their perspectives about the way our industry should be trained through a short survey (10–15 minutes).” Complete the survey here.
• July 21. Call for Papers Deadline: The Role of AI in Legal Education – Preparing the Next Generation of Lawyers at Westminster Law School, London. This September 11 event will bring together academics, legal professionals, students, and industry stakeholders to examine how AI is reshaping law degrees, particularly in areas such as curriculum design, assessment, teaching methods, and graduate employability. Keynote Speakers include Lisa Webley (University of Birmingham), Dan Hunter (King’s College London), and Luke Mason (University of Westminster). Submit here (funding support for early career academics available).
• August 1. Call for Papers Deadline: Association of American Law Schools New Voices Call for Papers Deadline. The AALS Section on Professional Responsibility invites submissions for its New Voices panel at the Annual Meeting, January 2026 in New Orleans, LA. Submissions are invited from junior faculty (those who are pre-tenure or otherwise with five or fewer years of experience), along with others who are new to writing in the field of Professional Responsibility. Those submitting work must be full-time faculty members (including full-time VAPs or fellows) at AALS member law schools. Work that has already been published (or will be published prior to the conference) is ineligible for consideration. Interested faculty should submit their work for consideration to Sarah Cravens [email protected] no later than 5:00pm Central Time on Friday, August 1, 2025, with “PR New Voices Submission – 2026 Annual Meeting” in the subject line of the email.
• August 7-9. Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers Annual Meeting in Toronto. Learn more here.
• August 12, 2-3PM Eastern. Measuring What Matters: Evaluating the Impact of InnovationsA Webinar Series on Judicial Innovation and Leadership. Building on the momentum of the Advancing Innovation National Summit, IAALS and the Berkeley Judicial Institute are thrilled to present this dynamic webinar series designed to equip judges with the practical tools and insights needed to drive meaningful innovation in the courts. The series will go beyond theory and dive deep into strategies that will empower judges to navigate change, build trust, and foster a more accessible justice system for all. This series is open to all judges seeking to become catalysts for positive change in the legal system. Learn more and register here.
• August 13, 8AM-6PM, University of Houston Law Center. AALS Southwest and Big 12 Law Faculty Pre-Recruitment Workshop: “So, You Want to Be a Law Professor.” Panel discussions and interview opportunities for future law professors. Participating law schools include: Arizona State University, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, Baylor Law School, SMU Dedman School of Law, St. Mary’s University School of Law, Texas A&M University School of Law, Tulane Law School, University of Arkansas School of Law, University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law, University of Cincinnati College of Law, University of Kansas School of Law, University of Mississippi School of Law, University of Oklahoma College of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law. Learn more and register here.
• October 9-10. Complex Litigation Ethics Conference, Center for Litigation and Ethics, UC Law SF. Learn more here.

2026

• January 6-9. Association of American Law Schools Annual Meeting, Section on Professional Responsibility Events. Learn more here.
• December 2-4. International Legal Ethics Conference at the University of Houston. Learn more here.

---

Keep in Touch

• News tips? Announcements? Events? A job to post? Reading recommendations? Email [email protected] – 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.