« The Daily Memo - 7/3/07 | Main | Is that an Adam’s Apple, or Are You Just Happy to See Me? »

What’s the adage about a lawyer who represents himself?

homerGayMarriage.jpgStephen Dunne is representing himself in a lawsuit against the Massachusetts Board of Bar Examiners. His federal lawsuit claims that the bar exam has violated his rights to freedom of religion, due process and equal protection. You see, there was a question about family law which Dunne took offense to because the parents in the question were a married gay couple. And because Dunne doesn’t approve of such a filthy thing, he decided not to answer the question.

And of course, when he failed the exam, he ran off to court. Mr. Dunne, non-Esq., wants injunctions against the Board, prohibiting them from including such vile questions on future exams, and to not consider his failure to answer the question in reviewing his application for admission. He says the problem with this question is that it requires him to “affirmatively accept, support and promote homosexual marriage and homosexual parenting.”

…This is wholly preposterous. The question doesn’t make him accept and promote gay marriage. Rather, it is saying “analyze the question within the bounds of the law.” It doesn’t matter how he feels personally about the issues. If there was a question about state abortion laws, it doesn’t matter whether I’m pro-choice or pro-life - as a budding lawyer, I have to answer the questions within the confines of the law because, if I’m to become a lawyer, I have to - you know - obey all the laws and stuff and work within them. Regardless of my personal feelings. I mean, under this rationale, if I were a more serious practicing Jew than I am and there was a question about working on the Sabbath, could I complain because the question requires me to accept the notion of working and using electricity on the Sabbath? Of course not.

Mr. Dunne, in answer to that adage, you have a fool for a client.

| Comments (3)


In this world where there is a lawyer on every corner, the fact that he could not find one to represent him screams volumes.

does that mean I can refer to myself as "Three Elle, almost-Esq."?

I've been waiting for something like this to happen. With the rise of pharmacists believing that they can choose what prescriptions to fill I figure this a tool that conservatives are using to try and carve out an alternate reality they can inhabit.