About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

114 W. Va. L. Rev. 109 (2011-2012)
Advising Clients after Critical Legal Studies and the Torture Memos

handle is hein.journals/wvb114 and id is 111 raw text is: ADVISING CLIENTS AFTER CRITICAL LEGAL STUDIES AND THE TORTURE MEMOS Milan Markovic* I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................110 II. THE MODEL RULES, ENFORCEMENT, AND WHY LAWYERS OBEY ..............114 A. The Underenforcement of Professional Responsibility Rules 114 B. Compliance and Self-Interest ...................... 117 III. MODEL RULE 2.1 AND THE PROBLEM OF COMPLIANCE ....... ........119 IV. THE TORTURE MEMO CONTROVERSY AND RULE 2.1 ................124 A. Background ............................ ...... 125 B. The OPR Report ......................... ...... 128 1. The Investigation and OPR's Standards .... ......128 2. The OPR's Findings .................... .....130 C. The Margolis Memo ....................... .....132 1. Standards Applied .................. ........133 2. Application to Yoo..... .....................135 V. THE MARGOLIS MEMO's FLAWED ACCOUNT ................ ......137 A. Reliance on Indeterminacy .............................. 137 B. Does Margolis's Account of Rule 2.1 Follow from the Ethical Rules?......................................139 C. Social Utility.............................. 141 VI. AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW OF RULE 2.1 ...............................144 A. Rule 2.1 's Honest Assessment ...................... 144 B. Application to Yoo...................... ........146 VII. RULE 2.1 AND INDETERMINACY .......................... .....148 A. The Indeterminacy Thesis........... ................ 148 B. Indeterminacy and the Challenge to Legal Ethics.................. 150 C. Clients, Indeterminacy, and Yoo ............. ....... 155 VIII. POSSIBLE OBJECTIONS ..........................................158 A. Penalizing Good Faith Legal Advice ............ ..... 158 B. Client Autonomy and CYA Memos ........... ...... 160 C. Is Identifying Countervailing Considerations Good Lawyering? .............. 161 IX. CONCLUSION.................................................... 163 Abraham L. Freedman Teaching Fellow, Temple University Beasley School of Law. J.D., Georgetown University Law Center (2006); M.A., New York University (2003); B.A., Co- lumbia University (2001). I would like to thank Richard Greenstein and Jane Baron of the Tem- ple University Beasley School of Law; Marty Lederman, Mike Seidman, and Greg Klass of Geor- getown University Law Center; and Mark Tushnet of Harvard Law School for their valuable comments. Katherine Knowlton, Sophia Husain Duffy, and Denene Wambach provided invalua- ble research assistance during the writing of this article. 109

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most