Confidential Government Info Can Disqualify Even Part-Time Public Lawyers
In Formal Opinion 509, the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility clarifies that Model Rule 1.11(c) disqualifies lawyers from representing private clients in matters where they could misuse confidential government information—regardless of whether they’re current or former government employees. See ABA Formal Opinion 509 (Feb. 28, 2024).
What Triggers Disqualification?
The Rule targets information a lawyer learned while serving as a public officer or employee that:
- was obtained under government authority;
- is legally protected from public disclosure; and
- could be used to materially disadvantage the person it concerns.
See Id. at 1-2. The opinion highlights that it doesn’t matter if the lawyer learned the information in a legal role or another official capacity—say, as a legislator or police officer. See Id. at 3–4.
Who’s Affected?
The Rule applies to lawyers in private practice—even those who still hold a public position, such as part-time prosecutors or town attorneys. See Id. at 5–7. It also bars representation of any client not legally entitled to the information, including public entities. See Id. at 8–9.
Notably, this conflict is non-waivable—neither the government nor the affected person can consent. Firms can only proceed if the disqualified lawyer is screened and receives no part of the fee. See Id. at 2.
Bottom Line
Opinion 509 sharpens the ethical stakes for government-affiliated lawyers in private practice. If you’ve served the public and carry sensitive knowledge, you may not be free to serve private interests—no matter how far removed the client or how part-time the job.
