The information provided in this article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or tax advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this content. Laws and regulations vary by jurisdiction and change frequently; always consult with a qualified professional regarding your specific situation. The author and publisher assume no liability for any actions taken based on this information.
- The ABA House of Delegates approved several Ethics 20/20 resolutions in February 2013
- These resolutions focused on lawyer ethics rules that the ABA maintains as model rules
- Resolution 107A and Resolution 107B addressed foreign in house counsel and limited practice authority
- Resolution 107C and Resolution 107D addressed court admission and choice of law in discipline
- It can help to separate ABA policy from binding law
- The ABA also publishes policy positions related to human trafficking
- Why these topics often appear together in meeting coverage
- Common misunderstandings about resolutions and model rule changes
- Sources
Key Facts
- Federal and state: Lawyer licensing and discipline rules are set by law and regulation that can differ by jurisdiction, so the practical effect of professional-conduct changes can vary by place.
- Federal and state: The American Bar Association uses its House of Delegates to adopt ABA policy and approve changes to ABA model rules.
- Federal and state: The ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 reviewed the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct in light of technology and global legal practice developments.
- Federal and state: The ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 reported that the ABA House of Delegates approved Resolutions 107A, 107B, 107C, and 107D at the ABA Midyear Meeting in Dallas, Texas on February 11, 2013.
- Federal and state: The Ethics 20/20 materials described Resolutions 107A and 107B as relating to limited practice authority for foreign in-house counsel.
- Federal and state: The Ethics 20/20 materials identified Resolution 107C as addressing the ABA Model Rule on Pro Hac Vice Admission.
- Federal and state: The Ethics 20/20 materials identified Resolution 107D as addressing Model Rule 8.5 on disciplinary authority and choice of law.
- Federal and state: The ABA has published human trafficking policies that include 2013 resolutions about vacating certain convictions tied to trafficking and recognizing an affirmative defense for trafficking victims in certain situations.
The ABA House of Delegates approved several Ethics 20/20 resolutions in February 2013
In February 2013, the ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 reported that the ABA House of Delegates approved a set of resolutions at the ABA Midyear Meeting in Dallas, Texas on February 11, 2013.
According to the Commission’s summary, the resolutions approved that day were Revised 107A, Revised 107B, 107C as amended, and 107D.
These resolutions focused on lawyer ethics rules that the ABA maintains as model rules
One major theme behind the Commission’s work was how changes in technology and global legal practice can affect lawyer regulation and professional responsibility.
The Ethics 20/20 page that describes the February 2013 votes lists which model-rule topics each resolution addressed, using the titles of the specific rules as reference points.
Resolution 107A and Resolution 107B addressed foreign in house counsel and limited practice authority
Resolution 107A is described in the Ethics 20/20 materials as addressing ABA Model Rule 5.5 on unauthorized practice of law and multijurisdictional practice of law.
Resolution 107B is described as addressing the ABA Model Rule for Registration of In-House Counsel.
The Commission’s summary also describes the revised Resolutions 107A and 107B as relating to limited practice authority for foreign in-house counsel, and it discusses limits on advising on the law of a U.S. jurisdiction or of the United States except “based on the advice of a lawyer licensed and authorized by the jurisdiction to provide that advice.”
Resolution 107C and Resolution 107D addressed court admission and choice of law in discipline
Resolution 107C is identified in the Ethics 20/20 materials as an amendment relating to the ABA Model Rule on Pro Hac Vice Admission.
Resolution 107D is identified as addressing Model Rule 8.5 on disciplinary authority and choice of law.
It can help to separate ABA policy from binding law
ABA House of Delegates resolutions are a form of policy action within the ABA, and the Ethics 20/20 page describes them in connection with the ABA’s model rules and related policy work.
In everyday legal life, many legal duties come from statutes, court rules, and regulations that apply in a particular jurisdiction, and those legal sources can use different wording and can change over time.
Because of that, a discussion about ABA model rules often overlaps with broader questions about lawyer regulation and public policy, even though the details that govern a specific case or a specific professional situation depend on the controlling law in the relevant jurisdiction.
The ABA also publishes policy positions related to human trafficking
Separate from the Ethics 20/20 materials, the ABA has published a collection of human trafficking policies, including several items labeled as 2013 resolutions.
That ABA policy collection includes a 2013 resolution that urges laws and policies that permit victims of human trafficking to vacate criminal convictions for crimes related to prostitution or other nonviolent crimes when the conviction is described as a direct result of trafficking victimization.
The same ABA collection also includes a 2013 resolution that encourages legislation allowing adult and minor human trafficking victims, when charged with prostitution-related offenses or other nonviolent offenses described as a direct result of being trafficked, to assert an affirmative defense based on being a human trafficking victim.
Another 2013 human trafficking policy in the ABA collection urges laws, regulations, and policies aimed at avoiding prosecution of an identified trafficking victim for prostitution-related or other nonviolent crimes described as a direct result of victim status, and it also discusses related concerns such as appropriate housing and protection.
The ABA’s human trafficking policy collection also includes a 2013 resolution approving the Uniform Prevention of and Remedies for Human Trafficking Act as an appropriate act for states that want to adopt that specific substantive law.
Why these topics often appear together in meeting coverage
Ethics and human trafficking can sound like unrelated subjects, but they can end up in the same meeting cycle because the ABA House of Delegates considers a wide range of policy resolutions across many areas of law.
Professional-conduct model rules focus on how lawyers may practice, while the human trafficking policies in the ABA collection focus on public policy approaches aimed at protecting victims and improving legal systems.
Common misunderstandings about resolutions and model rule changes
Some people see the word “resolution” and assume it describes a new law, but an organization’s policy resolution is not the same thing as legislation enacted by a government body.
Another point of confusion comes from the word “model,” because a model rule is often discussed as a reference point in legal education and legal reform conversations, while the enforceable rules in any given place depend on what that jurisdiction has in effect.
A third misunderstanding is assuming that one policy statement covers every kind of trafficking-related case; the ABA’s own human trafficking policy descriptions show that different resolutions can address different legal issues, such as vacating convictions, affirmative defenses, training, or uniform-law proposals.
