Browsing Tag

civility

Andrew Mamo

A Tale of Two Civilities

by Andrew Mamo, Professor of Law at the University of Cincinnati College of Law

Those involved in PIF may be interested in a new article recently published in the Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, A Tale of Two Civilities.

This article grounds the institutionalization of civility initiatives in the law in the legal, political, and cultural environment of the United States in 1971, when Chief Justice Warren Burger emphasized “the necessity for civility.” Crucially, Burger explicitly argued that radical lawyering practices lay beyond the pale of civility. In this, Burger was joined by a significant cross-section of the legal profession, including judges, leaders of bar associations, law school deans, and other commentators.

But even as Burger argued that norms of civility were essential to the reasoned adjudication of conflicts, those more sympathetic to radical claims and those with an anti-formalist bent argued that civility protected institutions from necessary critique and obscured the true nature of conflict by limiting what was discussable. A law professor warned that we lived in “a lawless society, and it is the executive branch that is acting lawlessly,” and argued that we needed to develop our capacities to identify systemic injustices. The alternative to Burger’s civility was a loose cluster of initiatives to foster mutual understanding across fundamental differences by frankly naming what was at issue.

Burger’s institutional form of civility constrained conflict while the alternative form of civility strived to make conflict speakable. Both persist within the law, but they pull in different directions. As we face a renewed “necessity for civility” today, this history of legal civility can help us understand its contestable function—and how we can educate lawyers who can reason through conflict without abandoning their critical vision.

You can read the article here. Please contact Andrew Mamo if you have any questions.

Andrew Mamo is a professor of law at the University of Cincinnati Donald P. Klekamp College of Law. His research concerns the history and theory of dispute resolution and negotiation, with an emphasis on the history of dispute resolution practices, the role of technology in dispute resolution, and the professionalization of dispute resolution.

July 2, 2026 by hami3258

David Grenardo

Civility Under Attack: Responding With… Civility

Professor David Grenardo has published a timely new article examining the role of civility in today’s legal profession. Amid declining social cohesion, heightened political tensions, growing mental health strain, and a constant stream of negative news, uncivil behavior has become an increasingly visible challenge. In such an environment, it is easy to become discouraged and to question how to respond to attacks on human dignity and professional decorum.

In this article, Professor Grenardo argues that the answer lies in a renewed commitment to civility itself, rather than resorting to escalation or retreat. He explores what incivility looks like in practice, engages with existing scholarship that critiques civility, and analyzes the tension between the First Amendment and efforts to uphold civility within the legal profession. The article offers a thoughtful framework for responding to incivility with principled, deliberate, and sustained civility.

The abstract of the article follows below.

Civility faces attacks on several fronts. First, civil conduct in society continues to erode. Incivility appears to be increasing in the workplace, and incivility also remains prevalent in the legal profession. Second, legal scholarship has set its sights on attacking civility, calling civility in the legal profession oppressive and racist. Third, the First Amendment has been weaponized to attack civility rules and norms in the legal profession. How should supporters and believers in civility respond to these attacks? The answer is with civility.

This Article argues that the various attacks on civility require a response embedded in civility. When incivility continues to ravage the legal profession, mandatory civility remains the answer. When legal scholarship attacks civility, the response needed includes a thoughtful, respectful, and civil retort. And when the First Amendment clashes with civility in the form of personal insults and attacks against individuals, civility should tend to prevail.

Part I of this Article provides an overview of incivility in the workplace, the legal profession, and society, and discusses the necessary response in the legal profession, mandatory civility. Part II discusses and responds to scholarship that directly attacks civility in the legal profession. Part III examines the intersection of the First Amendment and the regulation of lawyer speech. This Article concludes that as attacks on civility continue to mount, responding with civility remains the best solution.

You can read the full article on SSRN here.

David Grenardo is a Professor of Law and Associate Director of the Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions at the University of St. Thomas School of Law.

April 9, 2026 by hami3258