AALS hosted a six-part teach-in webinar series—open to law school students, staff, and faculty as well as lawyers, law firms, and others—that explored the ethical and other issues related to professional independence in the legal profession.
The weekly webinar series ran from March 25 to April 29. Webinars included discussion of the executive orders and federal investigations focused on law firms, proposed baseline principles for professional independence, judicial independence and the rule of law, separation of powers and constraints on the executive, and global and comparative issues, among other topics. Panelists included leading lawyers, academics, and other distinguished speakers offering a broad range of perspectives.
Each webinar in the series was sponsored and organized by a host school, center, or program, including Georgetown Law’s Center on Ethics and the Legal Profession, Harvard Law School’s Center on the Legal Profession, Indiana University Maurer School of Law’s Stewart Center on the Global Legal Profession, Princeton University’s Program in Law and Public Policy, University of California, Irvine School of Law’s Center for Empirical Research on the Legal Profession and the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, and the University of Washington School of Law.
Past sessions and recordings
Rule of Law, Executive Orders, and the Legal Profession
Wednesday, March 25, 2026
This panel discussed the executive orders, regulatory pressure, public accusations against major law firms, the resulting legal challenges, the different responses by firms, and the implications for the profession and the rule of law. The panelists also addressed some of the similarities in the administration’s campaign against law firms and its stance toward other institutions capable of challenging its actions. The panel consisted of managing partners of prominent law firms and others who have advised law firms and universities.
Moderator: Ann Southworth (UC Irvine School of Law)
Speakers: Hailyn J. Chen (Munger Tolles & Olsen), Mack E. Jenkins (Hecker Fink), and Peter Zeughäuser (Zeughäuser Group)
Principles for Independence of the Legal Profession
Tuesday, March 31, 2026
Organized by Princeton University Program in Law & Public Policy
This panel examined non‑litigation strategies that American lawyers and judges have pursued in response to government pressure on the practice of law. The discussion focused on coalition‑based efforts, including the Principles for the Independence of the Legal Profession, issued by a bipartisan group of retired judges. Panelists included a former federal judge involved in the Principles project and leading attorneys engaged in broader professional independence initiatives.
Moderator: Deborah Pearlstein (Princeton University Program in Law and Public Policy)
Speakers: Shira A. Scheindlin (Former U.S. District Judge, Southern District of New York), Neel Chatterjee (King & Spalding), Gregg Nunziata (Society for the Rule of Law)
Defending America’s Independent Judiciary and the Rule of Law
Wednesday, April 8, 2026
Organized by University of Washington School of Law
The judiciary was designed to be independent precisely so that it could uphold the rule of law, but under sustained challenges a constitutional crisis is inevitable. Not only does this weaken the American legal system, but it also undermines public confidence in the courts, stimulating civil unrest. In advance of a two-day conference held at UW Law (Seattle) on April 17 and 18, Judge Henry and Hugh Spitzer will provide information and insights on the state of the U.S. judicial system and how best to defend it.
Introduction:
Tamara F. Lawson, Toni Rembe Dean and Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law
Speakers:
Judge Robert Henry (ret.), Jurist-in-Residence (University of Washington School of Law) and Hugh Spitzer (University of Washington School of Law)
Professional Independence and the Justice Department
Wednesday, April 15, 2026
Organized by Georgetown Law Center on Ethics & the Legal Profession & Fordham University School of Law Stein Center for Law and Ethics
This session examined the relationship between the Department of Justice and the White House, with particular attention to how the Department balances its responsibility to advance presidential policy priorities with its duty to provide independent, nonpartisan legal advice. The discussion also addressed how this balance has been approached in the current administration.
Moderator:
Mitt Regan (Georgetown University Law Center)
Speakers:
Bruce Green (Fordham University School of Law) and Rebecca Roiphe (New York Law School)
At a Crossroads: U.S. Anti-Corruption Policy and the Changing Landscape of International Enforcement
Wednesday, April 22, 2026
This panel examined the future of foreign anti-bribery enforcement in light of recent actions by the Trump administration that have raised questions about the direction, consistency, and credibility of U.S. anti-corruption policy. For decades, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act has positioned the United States as a central actor in the global fight against bribery, shaping corporate compliance practices, influencing international legal norms, and working in tandem with parallel regimes such as the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention and the UK Bribery Act.
Recent developments, however, have prompted renewed scrutiny of whether U.S. enforcement is becoming more selective, politically contingent, or strategically instrumentalized. Against this backdrop, the panel brought together practitioners and academics engaged in cross-border work to explore how shifts in U.S. policy are affecting international legal practice, corporate behavior, and transnational enforcement cooperation.
Panelists consider whether changes in enforcement priorities are altering how multinational companies assess risk and structure compliance programs, whether global clients are recalibrating their reliance on U.S. counsel, and whether other jurisdictions are stepping in to fill potential gaps in leadership. The discussion also addresses the implications for international arbitration, cross-border investigations, and coordinated enforcement among regulators, as well as the broader question of whether the global anti-corruption regime is becoming more fragmented or more plural.
By situating U.S. developments within a comparative and international framework, the panel assessed whether this moment represents a temporary shift in enforcement posture or a deeper transformation in the architecture of global anti-bribery law and practice.
Moderators: Christiana Ochoa (Indiana University Maurer School of Law) Jayanth K. Krishnan (Indiana University Maurer School of Law)
Speakers: Kunle Ajagbe (Aidan Partners), Rachel Brewster (Duke University School of Law), Hannah Buxbaum (University of California, Davis School of Law), and Paul Stephan (University of Virginia School of Law)
The Profession, the Market, and the State: Reimagining Professional Independence for a VUCA World
Wednesday, April 29, 2026
Organized by Harvard Law Center on the Legal Profession
Traditional ideals of professional independence were conceived for a world where most lawyers were solo or small‑firm practitioners in a self‑regulating bar, operating within a state‑granted monopoly with norms of expertise and deference that largely insulated practitioners from bureaucratic control, external competition, and the reach of state power. Today, that world no longer exists. Most lawyers now work in organizations of increasing size and scope in markets where practitioners are subject to intense supervision, both internally from managers and externally by clients, and face fierce competition in a new legal services “ecosystem” rapidly being reshaped by “alternative” providers, “artificial intelligence,” and “blurring boundaries” between law and other professional services to address problems that are increasingly “legalized” yet extend far beyond law. And if the last year has shown us anything, it is that the legal profession is now squarely in the sights of government actors in the US and around the world who recognize its potential as an instrument of state power. Which is precisely why professional ideals, such as independent judgment, evidence-backed expertise, fiduciary duty, and a commitment to access to justice and the rule of law are more important than ever. In this webinar, presenters began a difficult and much‑needed conversation about what it will take to make these ideals meaningful in a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous world where lawyers will have to reimagine professional independence without the insulation and market protection that allowed these ideals to flourish in the past.
Moderator: David Wilkins (Harvard Law School)
Speakers: Lorie Almon (Seyfarth), Eli Wald (University of Denver Sturm College of Law), Daniel H. Yi (Harvard Law School)
AALS Student Writing Competition on Professional Independence and the Legal Profession
In connection with the launch of the webinar series, the Association of American Law Schools, in collaboration with UC Irvine School of Law and its Board of Visitors, also announces the launch of a nationwide 2026 Student Writing Competition on Professional Independence and the Legal Profession.
The competition challenges law students to write an academic paper focused on current issues related to professional independence in the legal profession. Paper topics may address a range of issues raised by recent executive orders and other actions by members of the Executive Branch affecting lawyers and the judiciary, including:
- the impacts of executive orders and other government actions on lawyer representation, law firms, and legal clinics, including concerns about anticipatory self‑censorship;
- the legality and effects of government–firm agreements entered into by law firms that settled with the government;
- the reported increase in intimidation, disinformation, and threats directed at the judiciary;
- conflicts arising from compliance with executive orders, including questions about a law firm leader’s fiduciary duties to sustain the firm’s practice while upholding professional obligations such as pro bono service, advocacy for the rule of law, and prioritizing client interests over government favor.
Entries are due by August 1, 2026 and can be submitted to [email protected]. A selection committee of judges, attorneys, and legal profession leaders from UC Irvine’s Board of Visitors will review submissions. Peter Zeughauser of the Zeughauser Group, a consulting firm for law firms, will chair the committee. The selected paper will receive a $3,000 cash prize, and the Journal of Legal Education has agreed to review the student paper for publication consideration. In addition to conformity with the subject matter of the competition, submissions will be reviewed for their thoroughness and depth of analysis, the quality of the thesis and argument, their originality and writing style, and the form and quality of citations.
Submitted manuscripts should be at least 7,000 words, while the expectation is that most papers will be between 10,000 and 25,000 words (including footnotes, tables, or other materials). Citations should be in footnotes and adhere to The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation. The paper should be appropriately and carefully footnoted.
Contest Disclaimer:
By submitting an entry, students confirm that their work is original, unpublished, and does not infringe on any copyright, privacy, or other rights. Entrants retain ownership of their work but grant the organizers a non‑exclusive, royalty‑free license to publish, share, or display their submission in print or digital formats connected to the competition. Entries that violate contest rules, contain plagiarized or copyrighted material, or are otherwise inappropriate may be disqualified. The organizers are not responsible for technical issues, lost submissions, or delays that affect entry or judging. Submission constitutes acceptance of these terms and of the judges’ decisions, which are final.