The paper explores the history of trial publicity rules in the United States. Part II discusses the enactment of the first legal code in this country aimed at limiting attorney speech and then analyzes the influences and constitutional restrains that molded the scope of subsequent rules. Part III discusses the amendments to the Model Rules following the Supreme Court’s decision in Gentile v State Bar of Nevada, which largely resulted in the current version of Model Rules 3.6 and 3.8. Part IV examines the discernible scope of permissible attorney speech under the current Model Rules as well as certain arguments regarding the appropriate standard for regulating attorney speech. Part V discusses some of the reasons why the extrajudicial speech of prosecutors in particular needs to be closely scrutinized and controlled.
Sciubba, Sean, "The Permissible Scope of Attorney Speech: Constitutional Challenges, The Current Standard, and the Need for Clarity" (2020). Hofstra Law Student Works. 19.