NoScopeNeko
Well-known member
Florida Bar Investigation into Pam Bondi's Conduct 'Dead on Arrival'
A group of lawyers, law professors, and former judges recently filed an ethics complaint against Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi with the state bar. The complaint alleges that she has sought to compel Department of Justice lawyers to violate their ethical obligations in the name of "zealous advocacy." However, the Florida Bar maintains it cannot investigate her due to a provision stating that it will not look into sitting officers appointed under the U.S. Constitution while they are in office.
This leaves Bondi's disciplinary options seemingly out of reach for now, at least as long as she remains in her current position. The state Supreme Court recently rejected a bid to force the bar to examine her case. While there is a theoretical possibility that a complaint could be filed against Bondi after she leaves the DOJ, it does not appear that this disciplinary door would automatically swing open.
On the other hand, Lindsey Halligan's appointment as the head of the U.S. attorney's office in Virginia has sparked controversy with her bringing high-profile cases against Trump critics James Comey and Letitia James. The former Trump personal lawyer is licensed in Florida, making it possible to examine whether she violated any state rules.
Florida's prosecutors are bound by several rules that impose special responsibilities on them, including one that requires refraining from prosecuting charges not supported by probable cause. Proving this standard appears nearly impossible, and another rule requiring timely disclosure of information known to the prosecutor could also be a potential issue for Halligan.
While it is still too early to determine whether Halligan has violated these rules, they offer more practical grounds than the probable cause standard in grand jury proceedings that seems to have been met by her actions. Other ethics considerations will come into play as the Comey and James cases unfold, including the requirement for honesty in court and legal filings.
The situation highlights the challenges of holding government officials accountable through the state bar system. As the Comey and James cases move forward, there will be further developments and potential action on both fronts.
In terms of what can be expected from the Florida Bar or any other entity, it is clear that any investigation into Bondi's conduct would likely face similar hurdles to those encountered by her office.
In order for a case against Halligan to gain traction, she must be shown to have knowingly violated these rules. Given the nature of these offenses, this appears to be an almost insurmountable hurdle.
Ultimately, whether or not these cases will proceed and result in disciplinary action remains uncertain until they are resolved through the courts.
A group of lawyers, law professors, and former judges recently filed an ethics complaint against Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi with the state bar. The complaint alleges that she has sought to compel Department of Justice lawyers to violate their ethical obligations in the name of "zealous advocacy." However, the Florida Bar maintains it cannot investigate her due to a provision stating that it will not look into sitting officers appointed under the U.S. Constitution while they are in office.
This leaves Bondi's disciplinary options seemingly out of reach for now, at least as long as she remains in her current position. The state Supreme Court recently rejected a bid to force the bar to examine her case. While there is a theoretical possibility that a complaint could be filed against Bondi after she leaves the DOJ, it does not appear that this disciplinary door would automatically swing open.
On the other hand, Lindsey Halligan's appointment as the head of the U.S. attorney's office in Virginia has sparked controversy with her bringing high-profile cases against Trump critics James Comey and Letitia James. The former Trump personal lawyer is licensed in Florida, making it possible to examine whether she violated any state rules.
Florida's prosecutors are bound by several rules that impose special responsibilities on them, including one that requires refraining from prosecuting charges not supported by probable cause. Proving this standard appears nearly impossible, and another rule requiring timely disclosure of information known to the prosecutor could also be a potential issue for Halligan.
While it is still too early to determine whether Halligan has violated these rules, they offer more practical grounds than the probable cause standard in grand jury proceedings that seems to have been met by her actions. Other ethics considerations will come into play as the Comey and James cases unfold, including the requirement for honesty in court and legal filings.
The situation highlights the challenges of holding government officials accountable through the state bar system. As the Comey and James cases move forward, there will be further developments and potential action on both fronts.
In terms of what can be expected from the Florida Bar or any other entity, it is clear that any investigation into Bondi's conduct would likely face similar hurdles to those encountered by her office.
In order for a case against Halligan to gain traction, she must be shown to have knowingly violated these rules. Given the nature of these offenses, this appears to be an almost insurmountable hurdle.
Ultimately, whether or not these cases will proceed and result in disciplinary action remains uncertain until they are resolved through the courts.