[Dennis Tuchler offers these questions.]
I just received a notice of a Call for Papers: Food Advertising to Children and the Law, for publication in an issue of the Loyola of Los Angeles law review. The call seems limited to the law governing food advertising, e.g. compliance with relevant regulations, proposals for regulations or the use of litigation to affect the decision as to the form and content of food advertising.
That brings up (to me, anyway) the old question of the proper role of the lawyer with respect to the activities of clients that affect third parties. Sort of like the questions raised about representation of tobacco companies.
The lawyer has a great deal of freedom, in theory, in the selection of matters she will accept, and the decision to withdraw when withdrawal will not have a “material adverse effect on the interests of the client." I am unable to find any ethical principle that gives anyone a claim on legal representation by any particular lawyer (even the last one in the state), at least in civil matters; so I find no particular attraction in any claim that a particular person has a right to representation in matters other than the prosecution brought against that person. Is there any reason for a lawyer to refuse to aid in the advertising activities of a client, besides lack of resources to devote to the project? To adversely criticize a lawyer's ethics for taking on and zealously pursuing the client's project?