Welch v. Brown

Michael Harless Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today, we filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court in support of a petition for writ of certiorari, asking the Court to review a California ban on mental health providers pro-hetrosexual therapies to minors.  Interestingly, the California law, SB 1172, does not ban pro-homosexual therapies.  We reject the notion that the Free Exercise Clause was written to give special rights to religious people.  We explain that SB 1172 violates the Free Exercise Clause, which operates as a jurisdictional barrier to the power of States, barring California’s encroachment upon matters of opinion outside its civil jurisdiction.  We also demonstrated that the State’s inherent police power does not permit it to conditioning licensing in order to suppress politically correct and morally unpopular medical treatments under the guise of protecting minors.

USJF Comments opposing Mandatory Pro Bono Reporting

Michael Harless Administrative Law

There is an effort underway by elements in the federal and state judiciary and leftist lawyers and lawyer groups to increase political controls over lawyers — on whom the American people rely on to protect their interests.  Some states are trying to force lawyers to devote free legal services to favored classes of persons.   Historically, this proposal has been a cover for the misuse of law reform, class actions, emboldening the courts to legislate social policy.  And even when it extends legal services to the poor, it frequently does so at the expense of the middle class. Read More

Article: “‘PC’ Politics Drove ABA’s Proposed Rules Change — A push for new classes of “harassment” in professional ethics reflects hubris and elitism”

Michael Harless Publications

We were grateful that the National Law Journal published the fourth article in the U.S. Justice Foundation’s series on the proposed ABA Ethics Changes.  This Op Ed was the lead in the National Law Journals email to subscribers sent out on August 8, 2016. Read More