In Re Amendments to the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar—subchapter 4-7, Lawyer Advertising Rules — Canady, J…

Summary

Canady, J., dissenting, would have rejected the proposed lawyer-advertising rules as unduly restrictive of First Amendment rights and prospective clients' access to useful information. He was particularly concerned about applying the rules to lawyer websites, restricting allegedly manipulative or intrusive advertising, and treating certain titles used by former government officials as deceptive. Pariente, J., dissenting, likewise would have rejected the one-size-fits-all approach, but specifically would have exempted websites and information provided at a prospective client's request from substantive advertising restrictions.