Abstract

Although there is considerable scholarship about a lawyer's duty to represent repugnant clients and about the moral nonaccountability of lawyers for the deeds of their clients, there has been limited discussion of attacks by attorneys on those who represent unpopular or controversial clients, and even less analyzing the ethics of such attacks. Articles on the ethics of environmental law practice make no more than passing reference to a lawyer's duty to respect the need for all points of view to be heard, and make no attempt to analyze the role of attorneys in attacks on providers of environmental representation. This article documents and challenges the propriety of attacks by attorneys on other lawyers providing environmental representation. The article begins by identifying some of the attacks and the justifications often given for such assaults. Because the attorneys making such attacks and others who have supported these tactics appear not to have considered the propriety of their behavior, the article then analyzes the legal ethics of such attacks by focusing on the formal rules of professional conduct. The article concludes by setting forth proposals for amending rules of professional conduct and law school policies to deter attacks on providers of environmental representation.