Supreme Court hears Bar rules arguments.

Bar rule changes allowing lines against UPL defendants, quicker Bar disciplinary action against judges removed from the bench and creating two new certification areas were argued before the Supreme Court October 5.

The alterations were part of the Bar's annual rules amendment package presented to the court earlier this year. Justices asked questions about a couple of the many proposed changes, and two Bar members raised separate objections. One challenged the proposed new Labor and Employment Law certification category and the other questioned changing the procedure for reinstating Bar members who are placed on the inactive list due to an incapacity not related to misconduct.

"Most of the amendments before the court today in this filing are purely editorial, conforming or noncontroversial," Bar President Edith Osman told the court.

Justice Charles Wells asked about changes to Rule 3-4.5, which currently allows coordination of Judicial Qualifications Commission actions to remove a judge from the bench with Bar disciplinary actions against the Judge's legal license.

Legal Division Director Tony Boggs said the amendment to the rule allows the Bar to seek to intervene when the case reaches the court, and to ask the court to also take disciplinary action against a judge's license as a lawyer when the JQC is seeking to remove that judge from the bench. That would allow the court to address both the JQC and Bar actions in one order, he said. Currently, the Bar does not begin an investigation until the JQC has concluded its case and the court has acted on the commission recommendations.

A constitutional amendment approved by voters in 1996 bifurcated JQC powers and also added lawyer discipline to the sanctions the JQC can seek when it proceeds against a judge.

On the reinstatement issue, Boggs said the current rule provides that petitions for placement on the inactive list for incapacity not related to misconduct are processed under the same rules as for disciplinary cases. But there are no standards or procedures for investigation, with the rules saying only if an applicant is turned down by the Board of Governors then the lawyer may file a petition with the court. The proposed new rule sets out a due process regimen for rejected applicants similar to that followed by lawyers who are suspended for disciplinary reasons and then seek reinstatement. Boggs noted the Bar has an obligation to check the applications to protect the public in certain...