Christopher Badeaux at the New Ledger looks at why the American Bar Association should be opposed to indicting lawyers for giving legal advice. One can certainly imagine a world in which lawyers would simply refuse to advise governments and other institutional clients as to what the rules governing some topics are, on the grounds that, say, the President should consult only his conscience – and possibly Scripture – before acting, rather than inform himself as to whether or not he is in compliance with the law. But that is hardly the world institutions like the ABA purport to champion.
2 thoughts on “Dock Amok”
Comments are closed.
Indict the torturers. The accused will have to decide for themselves whether they want to sue for malpractice.
One thing we can’t have is “my lawyer told me it was legal” as a defense. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break it.
I’m not sure that is ignorance. If I go to a lawyer and request an opinion, then act on the advice received, I may be ill advised, but I would not classify that as ignorance.
And it would set one hell of a precedent, Berto. We really can have “my/the government’s lawyer told me it is/was legal” defense. Then judge and jury can have at it. If you cannot act on legal advice why have lawyers or a legal system?