Learn more about our policy experts.

Media Contacts

Angela Bradbery, Director of Communications
w. (202) 588-7741
c. (202) 503-6768
abradbery@citizen.org, Twitter

Don Owens, Deputy Director of Communications
w. (202) 588-7767

David Rosen, Press Officer, Regulatory Affairs
w. (202) 588-7742

Luis Castilla, Press Officer, Public Citizen’s Texas office
w. (512) 637-9467

Other Important Links

Press Release Database
Citizen Vox blog
Texas Vox blog
Consumer Law and Policy blog
Energy Vox blog
Eyes on Trade blog

Follow us on Twitter


Jan. 31, 2011 

5th Circuit Strikes Down Restrictive Rules Governing Louisiana Lawyer Ads

Appellate Court Agrees With Public Citizen That Rules Violate First Amendment

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down several restrictive rules governing lawyer advertisements in Louisiana, agreeing with Public Citizen that they were unconstitutional.

 The rules, which took effect in 2009, prohibited references to past successes as well as portrayals of judges and juries. They also required disclaimers to be in such large type that they would overwhelm the ad.

 “This decision is a win for Louisiana consumers,” said Greg Beck, the Public Citizen attorney who handled the case challenging the rules. “The court rightly recognized that the state failed to provide any good reason for restricting these forms of advertising. Rules should be tailored to real problems, not written in response to biases against lawyer ads.”

 Public Citizen and two Louisiana attorneys, Morris Bart and William N. Gee III, filed the suit in 2008, arguing that the Louisiana Supreme Court’s new rules governing lawyer advertising violated free speech and imposed vague and unfair restrictions on how lawyers can communicate with consumers.

 A federal district court ruled for the state; Public Citizen and the lawyers appealed.

 While it struck down several of the challenged rules, the appellate court agreed with the lower court that a few were constitutional. Those rules prohibit ads that promise results or use a motto or trade name that implies an ability to obtain results. At the same time, the court read those rules narrowly to prohibit only ads that create consumer confusion. The decision leaves open the possibility that the rules could be applied unconstitutionally and then challenged in a new case.

 Public Citizen has successfully challenged restrictive lawyer ad rules in New York and is challenging similar rules in Florida.

 To learn more about the case, visit http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=2738 and http://www.citizen.org/litigation/forms/cases/getlinkforcase.cfm?cID=425.
Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org.

Copyright © 2017 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.

Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation


You can support the fight for greater government and corporate accountability through a donation to either Public Citizen, Inc., or Public Citizen Foundation, Inc.

Public Citizen lobbies Congress and federal agencies to advance Public Citizen’s mission of advancing government and corporate accountability. When you make a contribution to Public Citizen, you become a member of Public Citizen, showing your support and entitling you to benefits such as Public Citizen News. Contributions to Public Citizen are not tax-deductible.

Public Citizen Foundation focuses on research, public education, and litigation in support of our mission. By law, the Foundation can engage in only very limited lobbying. Contributions to Public Citizen Foundation are tax-deductible.