Ammon Bundy Lawyers Criticized for Violating Ethics in Offering Services to Militants

By Staff Writer | Feb 09, 2016 10:37 PM EST

Anti-government militant, Ammon Bundy’s legal team is in hot water for possibly violating legal ethics in offering their counsel to the Occupy Malheur National Wildlife Refuge leader.

Legal experts are citing the Oregon State Bar Guidelines to question Arnold Law Firm attorneys, Lissa Casey and Brian Boender who agreed to represent Bundy and the militant group he leads.

Bundy spearheaded the group calling themselves the Citizens for Constitutional Freedom, who
were convicted of arson on federal land following their militia occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge from Jan. 2 to 26 this year

The Citizens for Constitutional Freedom began as a peaceful U.S. militia march to protest the prison sentences of Oregon father and son rancher duo, Dwight and Steven Hammond, and ended up with the armed demand for the government to turn over ownership of the refuge.

Casey and Boender earlier met with Bundy, who was also indicted for illegal detention of refuge center employees, and the counsels agreed to render legal aid, KLCC reported.

Legal experts have pointed out Casey and Boender’s decision to represent U.S. militants on behalf of the Arnold Law Firm, is a potential violation of the Oregon State Bar Guidelines.

However, Casey has insisted she and her fellow attorney are duty-bound to render their legal service, and the Bar Guidelines only prohibits client solicitation if it is for monetary gain, Oregon Live wrote.

Casey further said the case will likely to be a long and expensive litigation, and has advised Bundy and his brother Ryan, who was also involved in the armed conflict, to source out funds for their upcoming case, OPB said.

Seattle University School of Law associate professor, John Strait, however mentioned that monetary gain is not the main point of the ethics violation. For the firm to have solicited the Bundy brothers to act as their legal aid remains the center of the potential violation.

More Sections