To Whom Does the Government Lawyer Owe the Duty of Loyalty When Clients Are in Conflict

Authors

William Josephson, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson
Russell G. Pearce, Fordham University School of LawFollow

Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Howard Law Journal

Volume

29

Publication Date

1986

Keywords

Government Lawyer Solicitor General, Government Lawyer Ethics, Conflicts of Interest, Elected Officials

Abstract

This Article focuses on the continuing debate on the ethical obligations of government lawyers: do government lawyers represent the people or do they represent a client? The Article explains that the dominant conception that government lawyers represent the people actually results in government lawyers representing themselves. After examining alternative approaches to determining the identity of the government lawyer’s client, the Article concludes that only one approach is consistent with both the ethical rules and our republican system of government. The government lawyer’s client properly understood is an elected official or, in certain cases, an agency head with legal authority independent of elected officials. As a general matter, through elections or law, the people have chosen these individuals - and not the government lawyer - to represent their interests. The only exception to this approach is the elected government lawyer whom the people have actually designated to represent their interests. The Article describes how the conflicts rules offer government lawyers a guide for determining their obligations when governmental clients disagree.

Recommended Citation

William Josephson and Russell G. Pearce, To Whom Does the Government Lawyer Owe the Duty of Loyalty When Clients Are in Conflict, 29 Howard L.J. 539 (1986)
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/246