There is a nefarious group that calls itself The 65 Project that has as its goal to intimidate lawyers into not representing Trump or anyone associated with him. They have threatened to file bar charges against any such lawyers. When these threats first emerged, I wrote an op-ed offering to defend pro bono any lawyers that The 65 Project goes after. So The 65 Project immediately went after me, and contrived a charge based on a case in which I was a constitutional consultant, but designed to send a message to potential Trump lawyers: if you defend Trump or anyone associated with him, we will target you and find something to charge you with. The lawyers to whom I spoke are fully aware of this threat — and they are taking it seriously.

There may be other reasons as well for why lawyers are reluctant to defend Trump. He is not the easiest client, and he has turned against some of his previous lawyers, as some of his previous lawyers have turned against him. This will be a difficult case to defend and an unpopular one with many in the legal profession and in general population.

Good lawyers, however, generally welcome challenges, especially in high-profile cases. This case is different: the threats to the lawyers are greater than at any time since McCarthyism. Nor is the comparison to McCarthyism a stretch.

[It’s probably a healthy mix of both. Trump got one of his own attorneys into potentially disbarring trouble on this very case by allegedly pushing Evan Corcoran into filing a false response to a subpoena. That is why a federal court took the unusual step of canceling attorney-client privilege under the criminal-acts exception and forced Corcoran to testify. How many other attorneys will be enthusiastic about putting themselves in a similar position?

With that said, Dersh is right about the 65 Project and the rise of a neo-McCarthyism. And he’s right about the damage it’s already doing to the rule of law. — Ed]