Page 45 - CLT112320

CLOSING ARGUMENT NOVEMBER 23, 2020 ¦ 45

EDITORIAL BOARD

Furthermore, most states carry rules of profes- And once lawyers are added to the equation of an
sional conduct for lawyers, which include rules already polarized society, we begin to see lawyers
like Rule 3.1 from the Connecticut Practice Book, initiate and/or defend lawsuits that on their face
which provides that a lawyer shall not bring or de- are less about having a good faith basis in law or
fend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue fact but instead intentionally done for political
therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for do- gain and disruption; creating an even more bitter
ing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good rift throughout the country.
faith argument for an extension, modification or More and more lawyers are becoming driven
reversal of existing law. A lawyer for the defen- solely by personal ideology and less on this hon-
dant in a criminal proceeding, or the respondent or code we swear to uphold. We see it in judicial
in a proceeding that could result in incarceration, appointments in certain parts of the country,
may nevertheless so defend the proceeding as to where judges are expected to execute the laws
require that every element of the based on personal ideology,
case be established. which contradicts the historic
Notwithstanding Connecti- importance of judicial impar-
cut’s civility, we can’t help but tiality that grounds our court
see what is happening around systems. What ever happened to
us. What are lawyers doing in the avoidance of being swayed
other parts of the country? How In Connecticut there is by partisan interest? And this is
much of a role is personal ideol- a level of confidence in true on all sides of political ide-
ogy driving the practice of law? knowing we won’t let ology. No one is shielded from
Can it impact the civility Con- politics disrupt our ethical this disruption, including those
necticut’s lawyers maintain and with all the best intentions.
duties as lawyers.

expect among each other? As The entire country is fraught
we contemplate these questions, with litigation that is solely
there is no doubt that politics along political lines to advance
over the past two decades has partisan political goals and tie
become more and more divisive. up legal remedies, with a total
Some individuals stick to disregard to merit. And occa-
party lines with no regard if it is right or wrong. sionally, Connecticut is not immune. However,
And some do not question the issues before them there is a level of confidence in knowing we won’t
due to a strong magnetic pull to remain loyal to an let politics disrupt our ethical duties as lawyers.
idea or political party. We witness these dynam- So, it is important that Connecticut’s legal
ics firsthand as a people, lawyer and non-lawyer profession keeps an eye out on such matters. Con-
alike. It crosses our dinner table, social media necticut must continue to uphold and demand
connections, news outlets, and even more so dur- civil discourse without the intrusion of increasing
ing congressional debates across this country. The divisive partisan politics. Let’s continue to use our
times of civil discourse are often forgotten. privilege in this trusted profession to honor our
During moments of conversation, some peo- oath and avoid vituperative attacks that weaponiz-
ple stop listening and disagree on issues simply es our legal system. Let’s remember Connecticut’s
because the person on the opposite end is consid- reputation for collegiality is built on a system of
ered “other.” Double standards are often deployed. honor. One that we are proud of.
¦

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune