David Crisp over at the Montana news site, Last Best News, (which, in my view, is a great addition to Montana journalism) has an excellent summary of the debate on proposed Rule 8.4(g) this morning. Crisp quotes this blog and yours truly suggesting that “The nearest thing to a defense of the Montana rule …” comes from my writing here.
It’s not very near.
To be clear to my readers, my goal here is not to support or defend the proposed rule change, but to provide information about an important issue facing the Montana bar. There are those who feel strongly that this rule change is needed – including the American Bar Association – and I’ve noted that. However, there are many others who have very strong views in opposition, and I’ve blogged about those as well, including yesterday’s post. The opposition has many credible voices, including those that were raised during the ABA debate over the rule.
I’ll continue to blog about this from an agonistic point of view, and will provide as much information as I can, not because I support one view or the other, but because I believe it’s an important issue with strongly held and credible views on both sides.
So, how do you feel?