You are probably aware that lawyer ethics rules in Illinois prohibit an attorney from saying things that insult the judiciary or that make false statements about the qualifications, morals, or character of judges and the judiciary.
This rule has a good purpose—the public must have a high and trustworthy opinion of the ethics and morals of the judiciary and have confidence that the judicial system works fairly. While it is OK to criticize a judge’s particular legal ruling, it is not OK to say things that would lower the public’s opinion about the qualifications or ethics of the judiciary.
Our Chicago ARDC defense lawyer at Ellis Legal explains more below.
What About the First Amendment?
However, this rule can often conflict with attorneys’ First Amendment rights—many attorneys don’t know where their First Amendment right to speak out ends and where the line of an ethics violation begins.
It should go without saying that anything that could be construed as defamatory to anybody (judiciary or otherwise) would violate the bar rule that prohibits speaking out against the judiciary.
And you cannot hide a fact as an opinion—saying “I think a judge is crooked” would most likely be a violation leading to an ARDC complaint or violation—putting “I think” before the statement doesn’t transform it into a protected statement.
Objective Back Up
But what if an attorney truly believes that a judge is crooked or biased, or the lawyer really believes some other accusation against a judge?
Subjective belief is not enough. The lawyer making the allegation or statement that impugns a judge’s reputation must be backed up and based on objective, discernable facts that can be articulated by the attorney making the statements.
Subjective criticism almost always will lead to a complaint and an ARDC violation. For example, saying a judge is “on the take” or “corrupt” would be a violation—even if you subjectively believe that because of how a judge ruled in a particular case.
A Higher Standard
Remember that things that the public could say about a judge are different from what an attorney can legally and ethically say. Attorneys, as members of the Illinois Bar, are held to a higher standard than the public in general.
Remember also that what may not be insulting the general public, may be insulting to the judiciary, and thus lead to a Complaint.
For example, saying a judge “always rules in favor of banks” may seem innocuous—there’s no blatant insult in that statement. But the statement suggests that a judge is not partial, unbiased, or neutral, and thus, although not on the surface insulting, it is sufficient to impugn the good character, neutrality, and reputation of the judiciary and could lead to a complaint.
In the end, be very careful when criticizing judges. If you must do so, make sure there are objective facts to back up what you are saying and that you stay above insults and baseless allegations.
If you are facing attorney discipline, or an ethics complaint with the ARDC, we can help. Speak with a Chicago ARDC defense attorney at Ellis Legal at (312) 967-7629 today for representation before the ARDC.