At a time when law firms are representing big tobacco and even corporate terrorist connections, those same firms are shying away from any notion of representing marriage, according to http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/12/us/the-case-against-gay-marriage-top-law-firms-wont-touch-it.html?mabReward=R2&action=click&pgtype=Homepage®ion=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&_r=0
The Federalist Society at Regent University School of Law, however, is at the forefront of the marriage debate, and recently welcomed Amicus Brief drafter John Eastman. To find out why the Supreme Court should rule in favor of state marriage regulations see http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2462093. Marriage is the foundation for family restoration.
Lawyer's have a special role to play in helping to preserve a fair, liberal, and just society. The stunting effects on liberty seen within religiously-motivated fascism and secular totalitarianism during the 20th century provide all too recent examples of the consequences when the rule of law breaks down: the foundation for liberty becomes too weak. Lawyers in particular have a specific role to play in maintaining the rule of law. This role was exemplified by John Adams when he defended a group of Regulars caught in the infamous Boston Massacre. Though despised by most the inhabitants of the city, Adams knew that as a public servant he had a role to play in representing the unpopular--even, perhaps, those in the wrong.
ReplyDeleteRule 1.2(b) of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct reminds practitioners of law that: "A lawyer's representation of a client, including representation by appointment, does not constitute an endorsement of the client's political, economic, social or moral views or activities." A lawyer or law firm representing fellow citizens who are religiously orthodox or who are secular conservatives does not, in such representation, endorse the views of the client(s).
Regardless of one's views on marriage, lawyers and firms should be willing to represent those with whom they may disagree. This does not mean every pro same-sex marriage attorney should jump at the chance to represent the first traditionalist that knocks on her door. But the instinctive reaction of disgust (lamentably existent among some towards gay people) can--and should--be cured. Living among and serving those with whom we disagree is an important aspect of sustaining a tolerant society. Lawyers should be leading the way.