The question is whether this is an appropriate basis for the bar to investigate and sanction a member. Once again, I am in accord with the Foundation in the view of Hamas as a terrorist organization. However, the bar is not the proper forum for such controversies, in my view, and the action could make it more likely that sanctions will be used in the future against other political viewpoints. I have expressed that same discomfort with the effort to disbar many Trump lawyers over their election claims absent unethical filings or unlawful actions. …

As members of the free speech community, we often advocate for the speech rights of those with whom we disagree. I have long disagreed with Rep. Tlaib on a host of issues, including the Hamas massacre. However, this action would cross a dangerous line in the sanctioning of political speech in my view.

For that reason, I must respectfully disagree with this effort and I believe the bar should reject the call for sanctions.

[As I commented before, this is the right cause in the wrong forum. This issue has nothing to do with Tlaib’s practice of law, and setting a precedent for disbarment over political opinion is not going to end well for conservative lawyers. This is an electoral issue; the proper forum is the next election. However, there still remains the Canary Mission investigation that linked Tlaib to actual Hamas fundraisers and operatives. That should be taken up by the House Ethics Committee and the Department of Justice rather than the Michigan Attorney Grievance Committee. Why hasn’t it been? — Ed]