NCLA Site Search

Cases

Cerame v. Bowler

CASE SUMMARY

Connecticut has adopted an amendment to its Rules of Professional conduct for Connecticut-licensed lawyers that includes unconstitutional and impermissibly vague language governing speech by lawyers. The provision, Rule 8.4(7), applies broadly, permitting sanctions even against those who have not knowingly violated the Rule, and supplies only vague definitions of actionable speech based on any one of 15 categories, including race, sex, religion, disability, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

Representing two Connecticut-licensed attorneys, NCLA argues the Rule violates the First Amendment, which fully protects offensive, derogatory, or demeaning speech. “Derogatory” or “demeaning” speech is not subject to decreased constitutional protection simply because it is spoken by a lawyer in a setting “related to the practice of law.” Rule 8.4(7)’s lack of clarity deprives attorneys of the ability to discern what speech and conduct it proscribes, so they will be forced to “chill” their speech on certain subjects to provide extra assurance that they will not be the targets of disciplinary proceedings for violating it in unforeseen ways. The Rule also grants enforcement personnel too much discretion to decide what speech is sanctionable and what speech is not.

Many states have either completely or largely rejected the adoption of similar American Bar Association-proposed rules of professional conduct because they infringe on free-speech rights. A federal court struck down one such rule in Pennsylvania in 2020.

OUR CLIENT

Attorney Timothy Moynahan, Plaintiff

OUR TEAM

Margaret A. Little
Senior Litigation Counsel

RELEVANT MATERIALS

NCLA FILINGS

Appellants' Reply Brief

April 12, 2023 | Read More

Brief of Defendants-Appellees

March 30, 2023 | Read More

Brief of Amicus Curiae Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellants and Reversal

March 1, 2023 | Read More

Appellants' Opening Brief

February 24, 2023 | Read More

Ruling on Motion to Dismiss

August 29, 2022 | Read More

SEE 8 FILINGS
PRESS RELEASES

NCLA Asks Second Circuit to Strike Down New Ethics Rule Muzzling Connecticut Attorneys’ Speech

February 27, 2023 | Read More

NCLA Contests Vague Rule that Unconstitutionally Chills Free Speech for Attorneys in Connecticut

November 10, 2021 | Read More

NCLA Contests Motion to Dismiss Lawsuit Challenging Vague CT Rule Regulating Attorneys’ Speech

February 17, 2021 | Read More

CASE HIGHLIGHTS

RELATED CASES
  • American Securities Association and Citadel Securities LLC v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Unreasonable Searches

    The Fourth Amendment forbids warrantless searches and seizures of information, yet the Administrative State violates this right to privacy through administrative subpoenas and warrants, automated information collection devices, civil investigative demands, and “voluntary” requests for information.

    Conditions on Spending

    Administrative agencies use unconstitutional conditions on spending to regulate the conduct of grantees. Rather than rule through law, the government simply purchases submission.

    Case Active - February 15, 2024

    Agencies: Securities and Exchange Commission

    View Case
  • Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Closed - July 1, 2021

    Agencies: California Attorney General

    View Case
  • Mark Changizi, et al. v. Department of Health and Human Services, et al.

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Active - March 24, 2022

    Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services

    View Case
  • RMS of Georgia, LLC D/B/A Choice Refrigerants v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: Environmental Protection Agency

    View Case
  • RMS of Georgia, LLC D/B/A Choice Refrigerants v. Environmental Protection Agency and Michael S. Regan

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Active - September 14, 2023

    Agencies: Environmental Protection Agency

    View Case
  • RMS of Georgia, LLC D/B/A Choice Refrigerants v. EPA, Administrator Michael Regan, in his official capacity

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Case Active - October 4, 2023

    Agencies: Environmental Protection Agency

    View Case

SHARE THIS CASE

Enter your email address above to be notified whenever we post a new document to this case.