The opposing voices to the attorney-advertising regulations, proposed by the Presiding Justices of the Appellate Division of the State of New York, reached a fitting crescendo with the release of a 29-page document jointly authored by the Public Citizens Litigation Group, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the New York Civil Liberties Union. Filled with biting criticism and analysis, these respected non-profit, non-partisan, organizations ultimately concluded that the proposed regulations are constitutionally infirm and unjustifiably infringe upon commercial and noncommercial speech.
The thrust of the group's position can be summed up by the following excerpt:
In short, the proposed rules would prohibit or unreasonably burden a wide range of speech for which there is no evidence that consumers would be misled. Instead of helping consumers, the proposed rules would serve only to stifle legitimate competition, making it more difficult for consumers to learn of their rights and ultimately making legal services more expensive for everyone.
Readers of our blog will remember the that Federal Trade Commission took an identical stance in its written opposition to the proposed modifications. To be directed to that particular blog post, please click on the following link: http://www.nyrealestatelawblog.com/2006/10/ftc_objects_to_attorneyadverti_1.html
Hopefully, the Presiding Justices of the Appellate Division will take heed and drastically modify the proposed rules or withdraw them in their entirety.
To download a copy of the "Comments of Public Citizen Litigation Group, American Civil Liberties Union, and New York Civil Liberties Union on the Proposed Amendments to Rules Governing Lawyer Advertising," please click on the following link: http://www.nyrealestatelawblog.com/ACLU%20Opposition%20to%20Advertising%20Restrictions.pdf