Letters to the Editor

New regulations for senior lawyers aren’t needed

More “nanny-state” interference and regulations are inherently aborning per the recent President’s letter. Every bureaucrat needs some legacy, some hitherto undiscovered problem found by him or her, blown out of proportion, expanded by the appointment of a committee headed by a future bureaucrat or candidate for some office wherein he or she can create another legend. All of a sudden, as there are more lawyers in California, there are more older lawyers in California. Well now, that’s sure a surprise. A further surprise is that older lawyers have problems. But not to worry. The Nanny Bar will appoint a committee and make those older lawyer problems just go away just as gun control laws reduce gun crimes.

Maybe older lawyers should provide special medical fitness reports in years when they don’t provide MCLE certificates so the State Bar can keep subjecting them to its rules and powers and, of course, growing the size and budget of the State Bar. After that, younger lawyers will have to show they have sufficient experience. I noticed in the bar’s demographics that there is actually a licensed lawyer who is all of 22 years old! Could it be possible (s)he requires mandatory mentoring? How could a 22-year-old offer legal and related advice to a CEO or a criminal client? If the geezers need help, so do the whiz kids. The Nanny Bar never stops.

In fact, it’s all about power – the power to tell other people how best to conduct their lives, all done ostensibly for the clients. They are but the cover, the rationale, so the moral preeners may act and create their legend.

It never stops.

Jim Sweeney
Pasadena, Calif.

 

California Bar Journal letters must include full name with a daytime telephone number
and complete address. Send letters to cbj@calbar.ca.gov.