Latest news with #legalethics
New York Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- New York Times
Lawyer Who Pushed Bogus Trump Elector Scheme Is Disbarred in New York
Kenneth Chesebro, a lawyer who helped spearhead a brazen legal effort to use phony slates of pro-Trump electors to overturn the 2020 presidential election, was disbarred in New York on Thursday, cementing an indefinite ban issued last year. The decision by a New York State appellate court concluded a strange legal journey for a Harvard-educated lawyer who worked for former Vice President Al Gore during the 2000 presidential election recount in Florida and later evolved into a supporter of President Trump. In a seven-page opinion, the court cited a criminal racketeering case centered on the fake electors in Georgia, where in 2023 Mr. Chesebro pleaded guilty. The New York court said Thursday that Mr. Chesebro's 'criminal conduct — conspiracy to commit filing false documents — is unquestionably serious' and that he had undercut 'the very notion of our constitutional democracy that he, as an attorney, swore an oath to uphold.' Mr. Chesebro, 64, could not immediately be reached for comment, and lawyers who have represented him did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The decision came nearly eight months after Mr. Chesebro was indefinitely barred from practicing law in New York because of his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. The theory that Mr. Chesebro pushed centered on the certification process carried out on Jan. 6, 2021. He posited that Mike Pence, then the vice president, could count bogus slates of electors for Mr. Trump rather than the real ones from states that backed Joseph R. Biden Jr., or otherwise use the existence of the pro-Trump electors to delay the process. In 2022, before Mr. Chesebro was indicted, he told Talking Points Memo that it was 'the duty of any attorney to leave no stone unturned in examining the legal options that exist in a particular situation.' Other lawyers who supported Mr. Trump's efforts to reverse the 2020 election have also faced consequences. In 2023, Sidney K. Powell and Jenna Ellis, two members of Mr. Trump's legal team after the 2020 election, also pleaded guilty in election-interference cases in Georgia. Ms. Ellis's license to practice law in Colorado was suspended last year. Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who became Mr. Trump's legal browbeater, was barred from practicing in New York and in Washington, D.C. Mr. Chesebro was mentored at Harvard by Laurence H. Tribe, a leading liberal constitutional law scholar. With Mr. Tribe, Mr. Chesebro helped represent Mr. Gore, a Democrat, in the legal battle over the 2000 presidential election recount. Mr. Tribe said Thursday that Mr. Chesebro was particularly skilled at 'coming up with arguments — sometimes too clever.' 'He's one of the few students who seriously disappointed me,' Mr. Tribe said, adding: 'He's a very smart person who learned how to manipulate and abuse the tools that the law gave him. And it was proved now that he can't be trusted to use those tools at all.' Kitty Bennett contributed research.
CBC
2 days ago
- CBC
Winnipeg lawyer charged with multiple counts of professional misconduct
A Winnipeg lawyer has been found guilty on more than a dozen charges of breaching his professional code of conduct, after three different citations were filed against him, and he will now wait to learn what punishment he will face. Paul Sydney Vyamucharo-Shawa of Winnipeg-based Shawa Law Office is guilty of a total of 17 charges of breaching the Law Society of Manitoba's Code of Conduct, says the decision handed down on June 20. The 67-year old attorney has been hit with three different citations since spring 2022, accusing him of acts including breaching an undertaking to the Law Society, breach of integrity, failure to treat the court with candour, courtesy and respect, and failure to be courteous, civil and act in good faith. He was also accused of recording conversations with clients and other lawyers without informing participants of his intentions, and of sending correspondence that is "abusive, offensive or otherwise inconsistent with a proper tone of a professional communication from a lawyer." A three-person panel decided Vyamucharo-Shawa is guilty of 17 of the 20 charges he faced in three separate citations, filed on May 26, 2022, Feb. 26, 2024, and March 13, 2024. The panel was "particularly concerned" with what it perceived to be a "refusal or perhaps an inability to accept responsibility and accountability for conduct which was clearly and demonstrably unacceptable," and said because of those concerns, they found some of his evidence "generally unreliable," the decision says. A citation filed in May 2022 includes charges of several improprieties related to a real estate transaction in which Vyamucharo-Shawa and another party were involved, while the citation filed on Feb. 26, 2024, is also related to that transaction. The March 13, 2024, citation included a charge of failing to carry on the practice of law and to discharge all of his responsibilities to a former client, the court and the public. Vyamucharo-Shawa has been a member of the Law Society of Manitoba since 1989, and this is not the first time he has been in hot water with the society. In 2019, he pleaded guilty on five charges of professional misconduct and served a six-month suspension from practising, while in 2000, he pleaded guilty to nine charges, three involving misappropriating funds from a trust account. He also received a formal caution in 1999 for breaching a trust condition. The Law Society said in their decision they will now contact their discipline committee administrator to arrange a date for hearing to decide what sanctions will be handed to Vyamucharo-Shawa.
CBS News
16-06-2025
- Business
- CBS News
American Bar Association sues Trump administration over law firm crackdown
The American Bar Association sued the Trump administration Monday, arguing President Trump's wide-ranging push to punish law firms is unconstitutional. It joined several targeted firms that have filed suit against the government. The lawsuit takes aim at a series of controversial orders signed by Mr. Trump that direct the government to cut off security clearances, contracts and even federal building access for some of the nation's largest law firms. The orders often fault the firms for taking on certain pro bono clients, associating with Mr. Trump's legal foes or engaging in diversity, equity and inclusion practices that the administration claims are discriminatory. The suit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., argues Mr. Trump has "used the vast powers of the Executive Branch to coerce lawyers and law firms to abandon clients, causes, and policy positions the President does not like," in violation of the First Amendment. White House spokesperson Harrison Fields called the lawsuit "clearly frivolous." "The President has always had discretion over which contracts the government enters into and who receives security clearances. His exercise of these core executive functions cannot be dictated by the ABA, a private organization, or the courts. The Administration looks forward to ultimate victory on this issue," Fields wrote in a statement to CBS News. The bar association's lawsuit cites the deals struck by several law firms, which promised hundreds of millions of dollars in pro bono work to causes favored by the administration in order to avoid future targeting by the government. It also argues the Trump administration's gambit has led to a "chilling effect," intimidating some law firms into not taking pro bono cases that run counter to the Trump administration's agenda — especially in immigration-related matters. The American Bar Association said it has been a victim of this chilling effect. The organization, which counts hundreds of thousands of attorneys as members, wrote in the suit that it has had trouble finding law firms willing to represent it in pro bono cases. The group has tangled with the Trump administration in the past: The Justice Department has said it will not pay for its staff to attend ABA events and has taken aim at the ABA's diversity policies. The group sued the government earlier this year for cutting off some training grants, arguing it was being punished for protected speech, leading a judge to block the policy. The ABA alleged in Monday's suit that in a lawsuit over grant cutoffs, it "was unable to obtain pro bono representation by any of the firms it contacted." The lawsuit asks a federal judge to declare that Mr. Trump's orders are unconstitutional and enjoin the administration from taking similar actions. "Whoever wins the next election will be free to squelch dissent based on policy disagreements," the suit reads. "There is no limiting principle: The next Administration might threaten adverse Executive Branch actions against any lawyer or law firm that dares to represent an oil company, or a gun manufacturer, or the Federalist Society or Fox News." Multiple law firms that were targeted by the Trump administration have sued over the orders, resulting in injunctions from federal judges that sometimes lambasted the administration. In one ruling that blocked the government from targeting Perkins Coie, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell said Mr. Trump's order sent the message that "lawyers must stick to the party line, or else." Several other firms have cut deals with the administration, promising to carry out mutually agreed-upon pro bono work. These deals are controversial within the legal community — and within the firms themselves — with opponents arguing the firms are capitulating to the government and may not be trustworthy. Supporters of the deals say the firms were put into an impossible position and risked losing scores of clients and attorneys if they chose to take on the government.
The Sun
03-06-2025
- General
- The Sun
Robert Jenrick joins calls for Sir Keir Starmer to sack lefty lawyer Attorney General who represented Shamima Begum
ROBERT Jenrick joined calls for the PM to sack his lefty lawyer Attorney General who represented IS bride Shamima Begum. Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick yesterday blasted the PM for continuing to support Cabinet Minister Lord Richard Hermer, whose former client list also includes Gerry Adams and a right-hand man to Osama Bin Laden. 3 3 In a viral video on social media, Mr Jenrick accused the Attorney General of having 'spent much of his life defending those who hate Britain'. He claimed Lord Hermer actively chose to take on the cases of terrorists and illegal migrants, even where legal ethics dictated he did not have to. The Shadow Justice Secretary said: 'Lord Hermer was a top human rights lawyer. 'He would have been inundated with cases, able to choose the pick of the bunch. 'And what's more, he often worked on a pro-bono or no-win no-fee basis.' Mr Jenrick accused the Attorney General, who is personally close to the PM, of being 'riddled with potential conflicts of interest' because he so often tried to sue the government. It came as last week Lord Hermer, one of Labour's biggest advocates of the ECHR, sparked outrage for comparing opponents of the foreign court to nazis. Mr Jenrick added: 'Starmer should never have appointed him in the first place. 'Why did he? Because they share exactly the same views. 'Britain deserves better than the pair of them.' Unveiling Lord Hermer's Legal Fee Scandal A spokesperson for the Attorney General's Office said: 'Law Officers such as the Attorney General will naturally have an extensive legal background and may have previously been involved in a wide number of past cases. 'Barristers do not associate themselves with their clients' opinions.' 3
The Guardian
31-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
US lawyer sanctioned after caught using ChatGPT for court brief
The Utah court of appeals has sanctioned a lawyer after he was discovered to have used ChatGPT for a filing he made in which he referenced a nonexistent court case. Earlier this week, the Utah court of appeals made the decision to sanction Richard Bednar over claims that he filed a brief which included false citations. According to court documents reviewed by ABC4, Bednar and Douglas Durbano, another Utah-based lawyer who was serving as the petitioner's counsel, filed a 'timely petition for interlocutory appeal'. Upon reviewing the brief which was written by a law clerk, the respondent's counsel found several false citations of cases. 'It appears that at least some portions of the Petition may be AI-generated, including citations and even quotations to at least one case that does not appear to exist in any legal database (and could only be found in ChatGPT and references to cases that are wholly unrelated to the referenced subject matter,' the respondent's counsel said in documents reviewed by ABC4. The outlet reports that the brief referenced a case titled 'Royer v Nelson', which did not exist in any legal database. Following the discovery of the false citations, Bednar 'acknowledged 'the errors contained in the petition' and apologized', according to a document from the Utah court of appeals, ABC4 reports. It went on to add that during a hearing in April, Bednar and his attorney 'acknowledged that the petition contained fabricated legal authority, which was obtained from ChatGPT, and they accepted responsibility for the contents of the petition'. According to Bednar and his attorney, an 'unlicensed law clerk' wrote up the brief and Bednar did not 'independently check the accuracy' before he made the filing. ABC4 further reports that Durbano was not involved in the creation of the petition and the law clerk responsible for the filing was a law school graduate who was terminated from the law firm. The outlet added that Bednar offered to pay any related attorney fees to 'make amends'. In a statement reported by ABC4, the Utah court of appeals said: 'We agree that the use of AI in the preparation of pleadings is a legal research tool that will continue to evolve with advances in technology. However, we emphasize that every attorney has an ongoing duty to review and ensure the accuracy of their court filings. In the present case, petitioner's counsel fell short of their gatekeeping responsibilities as members of the Utah State Bar when they submitted a petition that contained fake precedent generated by ChatGPT.' As a result of the false citations, ABC4 reports that Bednar was ordered to pay the respondent's attorney fees for the petition and hearing, refund fees to their client for the time used to prepare the filing and attend the feeling, as well as donate $1,000 to the Utah-based legal non-profit And Justice for All.
