Unafraid to tell it like it truly is, Public Citizen, submitted yesterday, in conjunction with the ACLU and the New York Civil Liberties Union, their comments to what can only be labeled ridiculous legal advertising restrictions proposed by the New York Courts.
The comments (pdf) attack the constitutionality of the proposed amendments on three grounds and urged the courts to reject the proposed amendments in their entirety.
- The rules do not contain an exception for nonprofit attorneys, thereby restricting non-commercial and political speech at the core of the First Amendment.
- The rules contain pointless restrictions on the content of attorney advertising that seem aimed more at limiting competition than helping consumers. Greg Beck of Public Citizen wrote about these restrictions in more detail here.
- The rules impose draconian burdens on Internet speech that would, for example, require us to print out a copy of this blog every time it is modified. Greg covered this aspect of the rules here.
As Greg posts, the proposed amendments have garnered a lot of negative publicity, especially in the blogosphere. Like these organizations, it’s my hope that the courts will come to their senses and reject this foolishness.
Technorati Tags: legal ethics