May It Please The Court: Weblog of legal news and observations, including a quote of the day and daily updates

Skip To Content

MIPTC Author:


The Sled:

Listed in Latino Who's Who, June 2014
Locations of visitors to this page

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Weblog Comments

Return to the Weblog

Quote of the Day - I was not lying. I said things that later on seemed to be untrue. - Richard Nixon, discussing Watergate

For Those Who Don't Remember Watergate. And A Reminder To Those That Do.

Seeking advice from a lawyer in this example is a bit like going to see the doctor. You want to explain all of your symptoms to the doctor so you get the right treatment, and the problem you brought to the doctor is treated properly.

So it goes with a lawyer. To get the right advice, people who consult us are protected by the attorney-client privilege. Anything said to a lawyer is protected from disclosure, with certain exceptions like fraud and crime.

If, however, you're a public official representing your constituents, should you be able to consult a government attorney and invoke that privilege to protect your communications?

The Second Circuit Court of Appeal thinks so. Ultimately, it looks like the Supreme Court will get the last word, if the Department of Justice appeals. Existing law recognizes that the government can invoke the privilege, but the question is not fully resolved.

The 7th and the 8th Circuits have held that government cannot invoke the privilege, and when a grand jury undertakes a criminal investigation of a government employee, conversations with a government lawyer are not protected. It's a matter of public, not private, interest that controls.

Seems logical. Do we want our public officials hiding behind the cloak of an attorney? Do we want open meetings?

Or, on the other hand, do we want our public officials to have the best advice and full disclosure of all the facts to treat the symptoms correctly?

In Watergate, Congress grilled John Dean, President Nixon's attorney. Did he honor the privilege (5-minute video of testimony before Congress)? Hear him tell it.

Seems to me the Courts are asking the wrong question. Who is the government attorney responsible to? Who's the client here? The citizens or the government official?

Posted by J. Craig Williams on 3/2/2005 at 21:10 Comments (1)



Comments by David Giacalone from United States on Thursday, March 03, 2005 at 11:07

Under D.C.'s Rule 1.6 (j), "The client of the government lawyer is the agency that employs the lawyer unless expressly provided to the contrary by appropriate law, regulation, or order." Discussions by agency officials with agency lawyers about agency business have therefore been deemed to be within the attorney-client privilege. Until a rule can be devised and adopted that somehow factors in the public's interests, perhaps government lawyers need to be better trained as to when to say, "under agency policy, this topic should be taken up with your own private lawyer."


Comments are now closed.

Send your comments directly to the author at jcraigwms at (remove spaces and add @ symbol in place of the "at").