Bar Director Proposes Stripping Larry McDougal of His Texas Bar Spokesman Role
In August or September, the board of the State Bar of Texas will discuss stripping President Larry McDougal of his spokesman duties, because of his online comments that offended many attorneys.
July 28, 2020 at 02:55 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
One of the most controversial proposals out of Monday's State Bar of Texas board of directors meeting would have stripped President Larry McDougal of his role as the agency's spokesman because of his online comments that have offended many Texas lawyers.
The issue lead to the bar board's first tie vote in three years, and ended with an agreement to postpone a vote until a future specially called meeting in either August or September. The delay will give the board's legal counsel a chance to review the idea and advise the board about potential legal issues.
McDougal's online comments said wearing a Black Lives Matter T-shirt to the polls violated a state law against electioneering. Another comment from 2015 called Black Lives Matter a "terrorist group." Another comment wrote that a female attorney was "hot" in one image but looked like a "meth head" in another. A fourth Facebook post was a photo of a police officer kneeling on a man's neck with a caption, "Justice happens before the trial."
He has apologized and pledged to take action to heal the division that his words have caused.
Noting that the bar president acts as a spokesman for the bar, Director Alistair Dawson said that McDougal can't be the bar's spokesman when there are serious questions about his appropriate judgment and communications. Dawson called on McDougal to resign.
He said the board has the authority to decide McDougal's duties, and it should no longer allow him to speak on behalf of the state bar. Dawson made a motion for the board to take the public spokesman duties away from McDougal and reassign them to the bar's executive director, board chairman, past president and president-elect.
But Director Rob Crain said that while he agreed with the sentiment, he opposed the motion because it wasn't presented in writing to the bar board's attorney. The motion may have First Amendment implications and bring potential litigation, he explained, which is why the board should get the advice of its attorney first.
Dawson did not oppose the delay, and the bar board voted to table his motion, send it to the board's attorney for review and issue a report at the board's next meeting on Sept. 24.
Later in the meeting, Director Santos Vargas moved that the bar board hold a special meeting, before the September board meeting, to again consider Dawson's motion to remove McDougal's spokesman duties.
Vargas' motion asked bar staff to schedule the special meeting during a time that McDougal, who will be getting cancer treatment in the near future, could attend.
Many directors spoke out against the motion, preferring to wait until September. But others said the board needed to take urgent action.
"Our members … have taken an entire day to listen to us today and they probably feel that nothing was accomplished. We have to push this to a finish line, to the goal post," said Director Diane St. Yves.
Director Andres Almanzán added that if Dawson's motion passed and McDougal's spokeman role was removed, then other representatives would begin speaking for the bar sooner rather than later.
Almanzán said, "How many opportunities is the president going to be given to speak on behalf of the Texas bar between now and Sept. 24?"
Director Steve Fischer said that punishing someone by suspending their right to speech as an elected official could violate legal precedent. It could bring liability to the bar, he said, which is why Fischer was opposed.
The board took a roll call vote on the motion to have an earlier meeting to vote on the motion to slash McDougal's spokesman role.
It was a tie.
"We haven't had a tie on a vote in three years," said Chairman Charlie Ginn.
When there's a tie, the chairman of the board must cast a vote to break it.
The motion passed when Ginn voted yes. He explained that bar staff told him they were willing and able to hold the earlier meeting.
He noted, "The motion, as presented, is to work with Mr. McDougal to find a date."
Related stories:
Lawyers Call On Texas Bar President to Resign Over Black Lives Matter Comments
McDougal Must Go? Directors Call for Texas Bar President's Ouster Amid #BLM Controversy
Amid Controversy, Texas Minority Lawyers Call for Action Against Racism in Profession
'Shame Is Not Strong Enough': Texas Bar Meeting Sees 61 Speakers Line Up to Address Larry McDougal's Online Comments
Texas Bar Board Pledges Action to Erase Systemic Racism, Boost Diversity After Marathon Meeting Over Larry McDougal's Comments
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
Jones Day Client Seeks Indemnification for $7.2M Privacy Settlement, Plus Defense Costs
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250