Navigating Today’s AI Landscape with an Ethical Polestar; American Bar Association (ABA), April 30, 2026

Afton Pavletic ,  American Bar Association (ABA); Navigating Today’s AI Landscape with an Ethical Polestar

"On November 30, 2022, OpenAI released ChatGPT to the general public. The model, along with other generative AI (GenAI) technologies, flooded headlines and seized the spotlight. Less than six months later, the story of Mata v. Avianca, Inc.  —a case in which the plaintiff’s attorneys filed a brief featuring ChatGPT-hallucinated case citations—went viral and fired an emergency flare in the legal community. With a growing awareness of AI’s potential to transform the profession, the legal field responded with a cascade of AI guardrails, guidelines, and task forces. Judges targeted GenAI usage with standing orders, at times outright prohibiting the use of the technology   ; state bars and legal associations issued opinions and recommendations tailored to the Rules of Professional Conduct  ; law firms and government agencies crafted AI-use policies for their offices  ; and the list goes on.

So where are we today? With avoiding ethical missteps as its compass, this article seeks to map out the current AI legal landscape. After launching from the shores of the Rules of Professional Conduct, it will discuss prevalent technologies in use by legal practitioners, the risks associated with the current wave of AI, how courts have responded to AI-related issues, and ways to steer your practice’s AI policy to avoid troubled waters."

Trump’s attorneys general are racking up ethics complaints; Democracy Docket, May 28, 2026

Jacob Knutson , Democracy Docket; Trump’s attorneys general are racking up ethics complaints

"As they aggressively weaponize federal law enforcement, President Donald Trump’s attorneys general are quickly amassing ethics complaints — and they don’t appear poised to stop anytime soon."

Lawyers raise ethical concerns over Pam Bondi’s conduct as Attorney General; WMNF, April 23, 2026

DARIA MIRONOVA , WMNF; Lawyers raise ethical concerns over Pam Bondi’s conduct as Attorney General

"Lawyers are raising serious concerns about what they allege is unethical conduct by Pam Bondi, former Florida Attorney General and until her recent dismissal, U.S. Attorney General, in a formal complaint to the Florida Bar and amid growing scrutiny within the legal community of alumni of her alma mater, Stetson Law School in Gulfport, Florida...

The outcome will not only address Bondi’s actions but also test whether the legal system will hold influential attorneys to the same standards as everyone else."

Why Trump lawyers won’t ask Trump University judge to step aside; Reuters, 6/6/16

Alison Frankel, Reuters; Why Trump lawyers won’t ask Trump University judge to step aside:

"As many, many legal experts have opined in the past few days, a federal judge’s ethnicity or national origin cannot serve as the basis for a claim of judicial bias. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, for instance, held in its 1998 opinion in MacDraw Inc v. CIT Group that U.S. District Judge Denny Chin (now on the appeals court) was within his rights to sanction two lawyers who asked whether his Asian ancestry prejudiced him against them. (They were involved in completely separate litigation against an Asian fundraiser for President Bill Clinton, who appointed Chin.) “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge’s impartiality,” the 2nd Circuit said. Added Alexandra Lahav, who specializes in legal ethics at the University of Connecticut: “There is no basis in the law or our legal history. It’s antithetical to the rule of law.”

Trump has a First Amendment right to express his opinion of the Trump University proceedings, which have certainly not gone the way he and his lawyers would have liked...

Outside of court, Trump can say just about whatever he wants about the case without much risk of being held accountable. It might be another story if the candidate were to express contempt for Judge Curiel or the proceeding inside the judge’s courtroom, but so far, Trump has not made accusations to Curiel’s face.

Nor are the candidate’s lawyers responsible in court for what their client says about the judge outside of the courtroom. The American Bar Association’s model rules of professional conduct explicitly say that representing a client does not mean a lawyer endorses the client’s “political, economic, social or moral views or activities.” Ethics adviser Thomas Mason of Harris Wiltshire & Grannis said lawyers generally do not face sanctions for what their clients say – and that goes double when the client is running for president. “How easy do you think it would be for any lawyer at any firm to control what Mr. Trump says?” Mason asked.

If, however, O’Melveny were to accuse Judge Curiel of bias in a filing that cited only his heritage as evidence, according to legal ethics experts, the firm could be accused of bringing a frivolous motion, according to Mark Foster of Zuckerman Spaeder and Barry Cohen of Crowell & Moring, who counsel law firms on professional responsibility."