Lawyers should avoid enabling harm to future generations but can still defend those who do, argues Philip Slayton
The world is awash with digital devices. Lawyers, typically not partial to new things, have had to face this uncongenial fact.
The relationship between community ethical standards and the law is a two-way street.
Do lawyers have an ethical obligation to represent the unpopular?
Do lawyers have an ethical obligation toward animals? Should they attempt to represent animals in legal actions against negligent, neglectful or cruel owners? Should they argue that nonhumans be given legal standing before the courts?
Should a lawyer follow a client’s instructions if the lawyer believes doing so would seriously endanger a client’s best interests?
The judiciary is a favoured target for Poland’s governing party
Law schools that want to promote political viewpoints are misled about their purpose.
After apartheid, South African lawyers moved from being immoral technicians to champions of equality.
A recent article in The Hollywood Reporter caught my eye. The headline announced: “The New #MeToo Economy: Hollywood Lawyers, Crisis PR Pros Seeing ‘Unprecedented’ Uptick in Business.”