Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1972343
 


 



Compelled Lawyer Representation and the Free Speech Rights of Attorneys


Leora Harpaz


Western New England University School of Law

December 14, 1998

Western New England Law Review, Vol. 20, p. 49, 1998

Abstract:     
This Article examines the Supreme Court's decision in Hurley v. Irish-American and compares it to the decision in Stropnicky v. Nathanson. It then considers whether there are sufficient distinctions between the two cases so as to defeat the First Amendment argument that was successful in Hurley. It concludes that the differences between the two cases are not sufficiently significant from the point of view of the First Amendment and that the application of the state public accommodation statute to a lawyer's ideologically motivated decision not to represent a client violates the First Amendment.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 24

Keywords: compelled lawyer representation, free speech rights, first amendment rights, Stropnicky v. Nathanson, Hurley v. Irish-American, constitutional law

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: December 15, 2011 ; Last revised: December 28, 2011

Suggested Citation

Harpaz, Leora, Compelled Lawyer Representation and the Free Speech Rights of Attorneys (December 14, 1998). Western New England Law Review, Vol. 20, p. 49, 1998. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1972343

Contact Information

Leora Harpaz (Contact Author)
Western New England University School of Law ( email )
1215 Wilbraham Road
Springfield, MA 01119
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 159
Downloads: 11

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.312 seconds