File Photo
When a bar association wants to take a stand against proposed legislation it opposes, it files a friend-of-the court brief. In so doing it takes a position on an issue.
It hasn’t done that in presidential campaigns. A prominent First Amendment lawyer is arguing that for the first time, the state’s bar needs to do so— because of an extraordinary threat to democracy.
The attorney, Dan Klau, said the bar should go on record against the candidacy of Republican Donald Trump, a man many lawyers believe poses an real threat to the rule of the law, the principle upon which the foundation of democracy is built.
Klau made that argument during an appearance on WNHH radio’s “Legal Eagle” program. He echoed a similar argument made in an Aug. 19 editorial in the Connecticut Law Tribune.
“The German bench and bar remained silent in the face of a growing threat to the rule of law and democracy in the 1920s and the 1930s, until it was too late to do anything. History teaches that the risks of silence are too great. The very least the bar can do is discuss whether it should oppose Donald Trump’s candidacy,” the editorial read.
The editorial also cited the preamble to the Rules of Professional Conduct which states that lawyers play “a vital role in the preservation of society….Candidates for public office who will not abide by the rule of law arguably threaten society. Donald Trump is such a candidate. The Rules of Professional Conduct thus support our call for a formal discussion by the bar about the Trump candidacy.”
Klau said the editorial board made the decision to write the editorial after considering a number of factors, including the danger of staying silent. (Klau is a member of the paper’s editorial board.) The editorial’s headline asked a question: “Should the Organized Bar Consider Opposing a Trump Presidency?”
Typically, state bar associations do not take positions on presidential candidates, Klau said. “In 99 percent of the time, they don’t. But this is the 1 percent. This is a Republican presidential candidate who…is a threat to the rule of law, a threat to the fabric of democracy.
“The rule of law is the bedrock of our country,” Klau said on the radio program. “It limits the discretion of those in power. Whether it is the president, the governor or the legislature, it requires them to conform their conduct … It is the antithesis of power. Dictators do not operate under the rule of law. The United States does.”
Bar association have taken positions on issues, on controversial issues, Klau said.
He cited the civil rights battles of the 1960s and support of gun legislation, “particularly Sandy Hook,” referring to a friend-of-the-court brief filed in connection with gun control legislation after the massacre of schoolchildren and teachers in Sandy Hook. Bar Associations have pressed for gay rights as well, he noted.
“They are not afraid of taking positions on controversial issues,” he added.
CBA Says No
Monte E. Frank, the current president of the Connecticut Bar Association (CBA), agreed that the CBA has taken legal positions on controversial issues.
“We have been at the forefront in defending the rule of law in various contexts. But we have never gotten into a situation where we have endorsed a particular candidate,” he said.
In an interview he told the Eagle that “while our members are active in elections, historically the CBA has not endorsed presidential candidates, and we are not going to do so in this campaign.”
Frank said the CBA is partnering in a legal assistance program overseen by Secretary of State Denise Merrill’s office to make sure that “there is a fair election and that citizens may exercise their fundamental right to vote.
“That will be our role” in the presidential election to be held on Tuesday, Nov. 8, he said. He said more than 100 lawyers plan to volunteer all over the state to handle voting issues that may come up at polls.
Click on or donwload the above audio file to hear the full interview with Klau on WNHH radio’s “Legal Eagle.”
###
This is nuts. Trump's a threat to democracy? What level of threat does a chronic, pathological liar who subverts the public's the right to know - who turns the State Department into an arm of the Clinton money machine?