A lawyer , according to , is "a person learned in the law; as an attorney, counsel or solicitor; a person licensed to practice law."1 Law is the system of rules of conduct established by the sovereign government of a society to correct wrongs, maintain stability, and deliver justice. Working as a lawyer involves the practical application of abstract legal theories and knowledge to solve specific inidualized problems, or to advance the interests of those who retain (i.e., hire) lawyers to perform legal services.

The role of the lawyer varies significantly across legal jurisdictions, and therefore can be treated here in only the most general terms.23 More information is available in country-specific articles (see below).

In practice, legal jurisdictions exercise their right to determine who is recognized as being a lawyer; as a result, the meaning of the term "lawyer" may vary from place to place.4

• In Australia, the word "lawyer" is used to refer to both barristers and solicitors (whether in private practice or practising as corporate in-house counsel) but not people who do not practice the law.
• In Canada, the word "lawyer" only refers to iniduals who have been called to the bar or have qualified as civil law notaries in the province of Quebec. Common law lawyers in Canada may also be known as "barristers and solicitors", but should not be referred to as "attorneys", since that term has a different meaning in Canadian usage. However, in Quebec, civil law advocates (or in French) often call themselves "attorney" and sometimes "barrister and solicitor".
• In England, "lawyer" is used loosely to refer to a broad variety of law-trained persons. It includes practitioners such as barristers, solicitors, legal executives and licensed conveyancers; and people who are involved with the law but do not practise it on behalf of inidual clients, such as judges, court clerks, and drafters of legislation.
• In India, the term "lawyer" is often colloquially used, but the official term is "advocate" as prescribed under the Advocates Act, 1961.5
• In Scotland, the word "lawyer" refers to a more specific group of legally trained people. It specifically includes advocates and solicitors. In a generic sense, it may also include judges and law-trained support staff.
• In the United States, the term generally refers to attorneys who may practice law; it is never used to refer to patent agents6 or paralegals.7
• Other nations tend to have comparable terms for the analogous concept.

In most countries, particularly civil law countries, there has been a tradition of giving many legal tasks to a variety of civil law notaries, clerks, and scriveners.89 These countries do not have "lawyers" in the American sense, insofar as that term refers to a single type of general-purpose legal services provider;10 rather, their legal professions consist of a large number of different kinds of law-trained persons, known as jurists, of which only some are advocates who are licensed to practice in the courts.111213 It is difficult to formulate accurate generalizations that cover all the countries with multiple legal professions, because each country has traditionally had its own peculiar method of iding up legal work among all its different types of legal professionals.14

Notably, England, the mother of the common law jurisdictions, emerged from the Dark Ages with similar complexity in its legal professions, but then evolved by the 19th century to a single dichotomy between barristers and solicitors. An equivalent dichotomy developed between advocates and procurators in some civil law countries, though these two types did not always monopolize the practice of law as much as barristers and solicitors, in that they always coexisted with civil law notaries.151617

Several countries that originally had two or more legal professions have since or their professions into a single type of lawyer.18192021 Most countries in this category are common law countries, though France, a civil law country, merged together its jurists in 1990 and 1991 in response to Anglo-American competition.22 In countries with fused professions, a lawyer is usually permitted to carry out all or nearly all the responsibilities listed below.

Arguing a client's case before a judge or jury in a court of law is the traditional province of the barrister in England, and of advocates in some civil law jurisdictions.23 However, the boundary between barristers and solicitors has evolved. In England today, the barrister monopoly covers only appellate courts, and barristers must compete directly with solicitors in many trial courts.24 In countries like the United States that have fused legal professions, there are trial lawyers who specialize in trying cases in court, but trial lawyers do not have a monopoly like barristers.

In some countries, litigants have the option of arguing , or on their own behalf. It is common for litigants to appear unrepresented before certain courts like small claims courts; indeed, many such courts do not allow lawyers to speak for their clients, in an effort to save money for all participants in a small case.25 In other countries, like Venezuela, no one may appear before a judge unless represented by a lawyer.26 The advantage of the latter regime is that lawyers are familiar with the court's customs and procedures, and make the legal system more efficient for all involved. Unrepresented parties often damage their own credibility or slow the court down as a result of their inexperience.2728

Often, lawyers brief a court in writing on the issues in a case before the issues can be orally argued. They may have to perform extensive research into relevant facts and law while drafting legal papers and preparing for oral argument.

In England, the usual ision of labour is that a solicitor will obtain the facts of the case from the client and then brief a barrister (usually in writing).29 The barrister then researches and drafts the necessary court pleadings (which will be filed and served by the solicitor) and orally argues the case.30

In Spain, the procurator merely signs and presents the papers to the court, but it is the advocate who drafts the papers and argues the case.31

In some countries, like Japan, a scrivener or clerk may fill out court forms and draft simple papers for lay persons who cannot afford or do not need attorneys, and advise them on how to manage and argue their own cases.32

In most developed countries, the legislature has granted original jurisdiction over highly technical matters to executive branch administrative agencies which oversee such things. As a result, some lawyers have become specialists in administrative law. In a few countries, there is a special category of jurists with a monopoly over this form of advocacy; for example, France formerly had (who were merged into the main legal profession in 1991).33 In other countries, like the United States, lawyers have been effectively barred by statute from certain types of administrative hearings in order to preserve their informality.34

An important aspect of a lawyer's job is developing and managing relationships with clients (or the client's employees, if the lawyer works in-house for a government or corporation). The client-lawyer relationship often begins with an intake interview where the lawyer gets to know the client personally, discovers the facts of the client's case, clarifies what the client wants to accomplish, shapes the client's expectations as to what actually can be accomplished, begins to develop various claims or defenses, and explains his or her fees to the client.3536

In England, only solicitors were traditionally in direct contact with the client.37 The solicitor retained a barrister if one was necessary and acted as an intermediary between the barrister and the client.38 In most cases a barrister would be obliged, under what is known as the "cab rank rule", to accept instructions for a case in an area in which they held themselves out as practising, at a court at which they normally appeared and at their usual rates.3940

Legal advice is the application of abstract principles of law to the concrete facts of the client's case in order to advise the client about what they should do next. In many countries, only a properly licensed lawyer may provide legal advice to clients for good consideration, even if no lawsuit is contemplated or is in progress.414243 Therefore, even conveyancers and corporate in-house counsel must first get a license to practice, though they may actually spend very little of their careers in court. Failure to obey such a rule is the crime of unauthorized practice of law.44

In other countries, jurists who hold law degrees are allowed to provide legal advice to iniduals or to corporations, and it is irrelevant if they lack a license and cannot appear in court.4546 Some countries go further; in England and Wales, there is general prohibition on the giving of legal advice.47 Sometimes civil law notaries are allowed to give legal advice, as in Belgium.48 In many countries, non-jurist accountants may provide what is technically legal advice in tax and accounting matters.49

In virtually all countries, patents, trademarks, industrial designs and other forms of intellectual property must be formally registered with a government agency in order to receive maximum protection under the law. The ision of such work among lawyers, licensed non-lawyer jurists/agents, and ordinary clerks or scriveners varies greatly from one country to the next.5051

In some countries, the negotiating and drafting of contracts is considered to be similar to the provision of legal advice, so that it is subject to the licensing requirement explained above.52 In others, jurists or notaries may negotiate or draft contracts.53

Lawyers in some civil law countries traditionally deprecated "transactional law" or "business law" as beneath them. French law firms developed transactional departments only in the 1990s when they started to lose business to international firms based in the United States and the United Kingdom (where solicitors have always done transactional work).54

Conveyancing is the drafting of the documents necessary for the transfer of real property, such as deeds and mortgages. In some jurisdictions, all real estate transactions must be carried out by a lawyer (or a solicitor where that distinction still exists).55 Such a monopoly is quite valuable from the lawyer's point of view; historically, conveyancing accounted for about half of English solicitors' income (though this has since changed),56 and a 1978 study showed that conveyancing "accounts for as much as 80 percent of solicitor-client contact in New South Wales."57 In most common law jurisdictions outside of the United States, this monopoly arose from an 1804 law58 that was introduced by William Pitt the Younger as a for the raising of fees on the certification of legal professionals such as barristers, solicitors, attorneys and notaries.59

In others, the use of a lawyer is optional and banks, title companies, or realtors may be used instead.60 In some civil law jurisdictions, real estate transactions are handled by civil law notaries.61 In England and Wales a special class of legal professional–the licensed conveyancer–is also allowed to carry out conveyancing services for reward.62

In many countries, only lawyers have the legal authority to do drafting of wills, trusts, and any other documents that ensure the efficient disposition of a person's property after death. In some civil law countries this responsibility is handled by civil law notaries.63

In the United States, the estates of the deceased must be administered by a court through probate. American lawyers have a profitable monopoly on dispensing advice about probate law (which has been heavily criticized).64

In many civil law countries, prosecutors are trained and employed as part of the judiciary; they are law-trained jurists, but may not necessarily be lawyers in the sense that the word is used in the common law world.65 In common law countries, prosecutors are usually lawyers holding regular licenses who simply happen to work for the government office that files criminal charges against suspects. Criminal defense lawyers specialize in the defense of those charged with any crimes.66

The educational prerequisites to becoming a lawyer vary greatly from country to country. In some countries, law is taught by a faculty of law, which is a department of a university's general undergraduate college.67 Law students in those countries pursue a Master or Bachelor of Laws degree. In some countries it is common or even required for students to earn another bachelor's degree at the same time. Nor is the LL.B the sole obstacle; it is often followed by a series of advanced examinations, apprenticeships, and additional coursework at special government institutes.68

In other countries, particularly the United States, law is primarily taught at law schools. In the United States69 and countries following the American model, (such as Canada70 with the exception of the province of Quebec) law schools are graduate/professional schools where a bachelor's degree is a prerequisite for admission. Most law schools are part of universities but a few are independent institutions. Law schools in the United States (and some in Canada and elsewhere) award graduating students a J.D. (Juris Doctor/Doctor of Jurisprudence) (as opposed to the Bachelor of Laws) as the practitioner's law degree. However, like other professional doctorates (including the M.D.), the J.D. is not the exact equivalent of the Ph.D., since it does not require the submission of a full dissertation based on original research. Many schools also offer post-doctoral law degrees such as the LL.M (Legum Magister/Master of Laws), or the S.J.D. (Scientiae Juridicae Doctor/Doctor of the Science of Law) for students interested in advancing their knowledge and credentials in a specific area of law.71

The methods and quality of legal education vary widely. Some countries require extensive clinical training in the form of apprenticeships or special clinical courses.72 Others do not, like Venezuela.73 A few countries prefer to teach through assigned readings of judicial opinions (the casebook method) followed by intense in-class cross-examination by the professor (the Socratic method).7475 Many others have only lectures on highly abstract legal doctrines, which forces young lawyers to figure out how to actually think and write like a lawyer at their first apprenticeship (or job).767778 Depending upon the country, a typical class size could range from five students in a seminar to five hundred in a giant lecture room. In the United States, law schools maintain small class sizes, and as such, grant admissions on a more limited and competitive basis.79

Some countries, particularly industrialized ones, have a traditional preference for full-time law programs,80 while in developing countries, students often work full- or part-time to pay the tuition and fees of their part-time law programs.8182

Law schools in developing countries share several common problems, such as an overreliance on practicing judges and lawyers who treat teaching as a part-time hobby (and a concomitant scarcity of full-time law professors);8384 incompetent faculty with questionable credentials;85 and textbooks that lag behind the current state of the law by two or three decades.8687

Some jurisdictions grant a "diploma privilege" to certain institutions, so that merely earning a degree or credential from those institutions is the primary qualification for practicing law.88 Mexico allows with a law degree to practice law.89 However, in a large number of countries, a law student must pass a bar examination (or a series of such examinations) before receiving a license to practice.889091 In a handful of U.S. states, one may become an attorney by simply passing the bar examination, without having to attend law school first (though very few people actually become lawyers that way).92

Some countries require a formal apprenticeship with an experienced practitioner, while others do not.93 For example, a few jurisdictions still allow an apprenticeship in place of any kind of formal legal education (though the number of persons who actually become lawyers that way is increasingly rare).94

The career structure of lawyers varies widely from one country to the next.

In most common law countries, especially those with fused professions, lawyers have many options over the course of their careers. Besides private practice, they can always aspire to becoming a prosecutor, government counsel, corporate in-house counsel, administrative law judge, judge, arbitrator, law professor, or politician.95 There are also many non-legal jobs which legal training is good preparation for, such as corporate executive, government administrator, investment banker, entrepreneur, or journalist.96 In developing countries like India, a large majority of law students never actually practice, but simply use their law degree as a foundation for careers in other fields.97

In most civil law countries, lawyers generally structure their legal education around their chosen specialty; the boundaries between different types of lawyers are carefully defined and hard to cross. After one earns a law degree, career mobility may be severely constrained.98 For example, unlike their American counterparts,99 it is difficult for German judges to leave the bench and become advocates in private practice.100 Another interesting example is France, where for much of the 20th century, all magistrates were graduates of an elite professional school for judges. Although the French magistracy has begun experimenting with the Anglo-American model of appointing judges from accomplished advocates, the few advocates who have actually joined the bench this way are looked down upon by their colleagues who have taken the traditional route to magistracy.101

In a few civil law countries, such as Sweden,102 the legal profession is rigorously bifurcated and everyone within it can easily change roles and arenas.

In many countries, lawyers are general practitioners who will take almost any kind of case that walks in the door.103 In others, there has been a tendency since the start of the 20th century for lawyers to specialize early in their careers.104105 In countries where specialization is prevalent, many lawyers specialize in representing one side in one particular area of the law; thus, it is common in the United States to hear of plaintiffs' personal injury attorneys.106

Lawyers in private practice generally work in specialized businesses known as law firms,107 with the exception of English barristers. The vast majority of law firms worldwide are small businesses that range in size from 1 to 10 lawyers.108 The United States, with its large number of firms with more than 50 lawyers, is an exception.109 The United Kingdom and Australia are also exceptions, as the UK, Australia and the U.S. are now home to several firms with more than 1,000 lawyers after a wave of mergers in the late 1990s.

Notably, barristers in England and Wales and some states in Australia do work in "law firms". Those who offer their services to the general public — as opposed to those working "in house" — are required to be self-employed.110 Most work in groupings known as "sets" or "chambers", where some administrative and marketing costs are shared. An important effect of this different organizational structure is that there is no conflict of interest where barristers in the same chambers work for opposing sides in a case, and in some specialised chambers this is commonplace.

In some jurisdictions, either the judiciary111 or the Ministry of Justice112 directly supervises the admission, licensing, and regulation of lawyers.

Other jurisdictions, by statute, tradition, or court order, have granted such powers to a professional association which all lawyers must belong to.113 In the U.S., such associations are known as mandatory, integrated, or unified bar associations. In the Commonwealth of Nations, similar organizations are known as Inns of Court, bar councils or law societies.114 In civil law countries, comparable organizations are known as Orders of Advocates,115 Chambers of Advocates,116 Colleges of Advocates,117 Faculties of Advocates,118 or similar names. Generally, a nonmember caught practicing law may be liable for the crime of unauthorized practice of law.119

In common law countries with ided legal professions, barristers traditionally belong to the bar council (or an Inn of Court) and solicitors belong to the law society. In the English-speaking world, the largest mandatory professional association of lawyers is the State Bar of California, with 200,000 members.

Some countries admit and regulate lawyers at the national level, so that a lawyer, once licensed, can argue cases in any court in the land. This is common in small countries like New Zealand, Japan, and Belgium.120 Others, especially those with federal governments, tend to regulate lawyers at the state or provincial level; this is the case in the United States,121 Canada,122 Australia,123 and Switzerland,124 to name a few. Brazil is the most well-known federal government that regulates lawyers at the national level.125

Some countries, like Italy, regulate lawyers at the regional level,126 and a few, like Belgium, even regulate them at the local level (that is, they are licensed and regulated by the local equivalent of bar associations but can advocate in courts nationwide).127 In Germany, lawyers are admitted to regional bars and may appear for clients before all courts nationwide with the exception of the Federal Court of Justice of Germany ( or BGH); oddly, securing admission to the BGH's bar limits a lawyer's practice solely to the supreme federal courts and the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany.128

Generally, geographic limitations can be troublesome for a lawyer who discovers that his client's cause requires him to litigate in a court beyond the normal geographic scope of his license. Although most courts have special rules for such occasions, the lawyer will still have to deal with a different set of professional responsibility rules, as well as the possibility of other differences in substantive and procedural law.

Some countries grant licenses to non-resident lawyers, who may then appear regularly on behalf of foreign clients. Others require all lawyers to live in the jurisdiction or to even hold national citizenship as a prerequisite for receiving a license to practice. But the trend in industrialized countries since the 1970s has been to abolish citizenship and residency restrictions. For example, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down a citizenship requirement on equality rights grounds in 1989,129 and similarly, American citizenship and residency requirements were struck down as unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 and 1985, respectively.130 The European Court of Justice made similar decisions in 1974 and 1977 striking down citizenship restrictions in Belgium and France.131

A key difference among countries is whether lawyers should be regulated solely by an independent judiciary and its subordinate institutions (a self-regulating legal profession), or whether lawyers should be subject to supervision by the Ministry of Justice in the executive branch.

In most civil law countries, the government has traditionally exercised tight control over the legal profession in order to ensure a steady supply of loyal judges and bureaucrats. That is, lawyers were expected first and foremost to serve the state, and the availability of counsel for private litigants was an afterthought.132 Even in civil law countries like Norway which have partially self-regulating professions, the Ministry of Justice is the sole issuer of licenses, and makes its own independent re-evaluation of a lawyer's fitness to practice after a lawyer has been expelled from the Advocates' Association.133 Brazil is an unusual exception in that its national Order of Advocates has become a fully self-regulating institution (with direct control over licensing) and has successfully resisted government attempts to place it under the control of the Ministry of Labor.134135

Of all the civil law countries, Communist countries historically went the farthest towards total state control, with all Communist lawyers forced to practice in collectives by the mid-1950s.136137 China is a prime example: technically, the People's Republic of China did not have lawyers, and instead had only poorly-trained, state-employed "legal workers," prior to the enactment of a comprehensive reform package in 1996 by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress.138

In contrast, common law lawyers have traditionally regulated themselves through institutions where the influence of non-lawyers, if any, was weak and indirect (despite nominal state control).139 Such institutions have been traditionally dominated by private practitioners who opposed strong state control of the profession on the grounds that it would endanger the ability of lawyers to zealously and competently advocate their clients' causes in the adversarial system of justice.140

However, the concept of the self-regulating profession has been criticized as a sham which serves to legitimize the professional monopoly while protecting the profession from public scrutiny.141 Disciplinary mechanisms have been astonishingly ineffective, and penalties have been light or nonexistent.142143144

Lawyers are always free to form voluntary associations of their own, apart from any licensing or mandatory membership that may be required by the laws of their jurisdiction. Like their mandatory counterparts, such organizations may exist at all geographic levels.145146 In American English, such associations are known as voluntary bar associations.147 The largest voluntary professional association of lawyers in the English-speaking world is the American Bar Association.

In some countries, like France and Italy, lawyers have also formed trade unions.148

Hostility towards the legal profession is a widespread phenomenon. The legal profession was abolished in Prussia in 1780 and in France in 1789, though both countries eventually realized that their judicial systems could not function efficiently without lawyers.149 Complaints about too many lawyers were common in both England and the United States in the 1840s150151 Germany in the 1910s,152 and in Australia,153 Canada,154 the United States,155156157 and Scotland158 in the 1980s.

Public distrust of lawyers reached record heights in the United States after the Watergate scandal.159157 In the aftermath of Watergate, legal self-help books became popular among those who wished to solve their legal problems without having to deal with lawyers.160 Lawyer jokes (already a perennial favorite) also soared in popularity in English-speaking North America as a result of Watergate.161 In 1989, American legal self-help publisher Nolo Press published a 171-page compilation of negative anecdotes about lawyers from throughout human history.162

A 2004 comparative study examined the various legal professions around the world and noted a "remarkable consistency" in complaints about lawyers that transcends both time and locale.163 The authors then generalized the most common complaints about lawyers as follows:

Lawyers are paid for their work in a variety of ways. In private practice, they may work for an hourly fee according to a billable hour structure,165 a contingency fee166 (usually in cases involving personal injury), or a lump sum payment if the matter is straightforward. Normally, most lawyers negotiate a written fee agreement up front and may require a non-refundable retainer in advance. In many countries there are fee-shifting arrangements by which the loser must pay the winner's fees and costs; the United States is the major exception,167 although in turn, its legislators have carved out many exceptions to the so-called "American Rule" of no fee shifting.

Lawyers working directly on the payroll of governments, nonprofits, and corporations usually earn a regular annual salary.168 In many countries, with the notable exception of Germany,169 lawyers can also volunteer their labor in the service of worthy causes through an arrangement called (for the common good).170 Traditionally such work was performed on behalf of the poor, but in some countries it has now expanded to many other causes such as the environment.

In some countries, there are legal aid lawyers who specialize in providing legal services to the indigent.171172 France and Spain even have formal fee structures by which lawyers are compensated by the government for legal aid cases on a per-case basis.173 A similar system, though not as extensive or generous, operates in Australia, Canada, as well as South Africa.

In other countries, legal aid specialists are practically nonexistent. This may be because non-lawyers are allowed to provide such services; in both Italy and Belgium, trade unions and political parties provide what can be characterized as legal aid services.174 Some legal aid in Belgium is also provided by young lawyer apprentices subsidized by local bar associations (known as the system), as well as consumer protection nonprofit organizations and Public Assistance Agencies subsidized by local governments.175 In Germany, mandatory fee structures have enabled widespread implementation of affordable legal expense insurance.176

The earliest people who could be described as "lawyers" were probably the orators of ancient Athens (see History of Athens). However, Athenian orators faced serious structural obstacles. First, there was a rule that iniduals were supposed to plead their own cases, which was soon bypassed by the increasing tendency of iniduals to ask a "friend" for assistance.177 However, around the middle of the fourth century, the Athenians disposed of the perfunctory request for a friend.178 Second, a more serious obstacle, which the Athenian orators never completely overcame, was the rule that no one could take a fee to plead the cause of another. This law was widely disregarded in practice, but was never abolished, which meant that orators could present themselves as legal professionals or experts.179 They had to uphold the legal fiction that they were merely an ordinary citizen generously helping out a friend for free, and thus they could never organize into a real profession — with professional associations and titles and all the other pomp and circumstance — like their modern counterparts.180 Therefore, if one narrows the definition to those men who could practice the legal profession openly and legally, then the first lawyers would have to be the orators of ancient Rome.181

A law enacted in 204 BC barred Roman advocates from taking fees, but the law was widely ignored.182 The ban on fees was abolished by Emperor Claudius, who legalized advocacy as a profession and allowed the Roman advocates to become the first lawyers who could practice openly — but he also imposed a fee ceiling of 10,000 sesterces.183 This was apparently not much money; the Satires of Juvenal complain that there was no money in working as an advocate.184

Like their Greek contemporaries, early Roman advocates were trained in rhetoric, not law, and the judges before whom they argued were also not law-trained.185 But very early on, unlike Athens, Rome developed a class of specialists who were learned in the law, known as jurisconsults ().186 Jurisconsults were wealthy amateurs who dabbled in law as an intellectual hobby; they did not make their primary living from it.187 They gave legal opinions () on legal issues to all comers (a practice known as ).188 Roman judges and governors would routinely consult with an advisory panel of jurisconsults before rendering a decision, and advocates and ordinary people also went to jurisconsults for legal opinions.189 Thus, the Romans were the first to have a class of people who spent their days thinking about legal problems, and this is why their law became so "precise, detailed, and technical."190

During the Roman Republic and the early Roman Empire, jurisconsults and advocates were unregulated, since the former were amateurs and the latter were technically illegal.191 Any citizen could call himself an advocate or a legal expert, though whether people believed him would depend upon his personal reputation. This changed once Claudius legalized the legal profession. By the start of the Byzantine Empire, the legal profession had become well-established, heavily regulated, and highly stratified.192 The centralization and bureaucratization of the profession was apparently gradual at first, but accelerated during the reign of Emperor Hadrian.193 At the same time, the jurisconsults went into decline during the imperial period.194

In the words of Fritz Schulz, "by the fourth century things had changed in the eastern Empire: advocates now were really lawyers."195 For example, by the fourth century, advocates had to be enrolled on the bar of a court to argue before it, they could only be attached to one court at a time, and there were restrictions (which came and went depending upon who was emperor) on how many advocates could be enrolled at a particular court.196 By the 380s, advocates were studying law in addition to rhetoric (thus reducing the need for a separate class of jurisconsults); in 460, Emperor Leo imposed a requirement that new advocates seeking admission had to produce testimonials from their teachers; and by the sixth century, a regular course of legal study lasting about four years was required for admission.197 Claudius's fee ceiling lasted all the way into the Byzantine period, though by then it was measured at 100 solidi.198 Of course, it was widely evaded, either through demands for maintenance and expenses or a barter transaction.199 The latter was cause for disbarment.200

The notaries () appeared in the late Roman Empire. Like their modern-day descendants, the civil law notaries, they were responsible for drafting wills, conveyances, and contracts.201 They were ubiquitous and most villages had one.202 In Roman times, notaries were widely considered to be inferior to advocates and jurisconsults.203 Roman notaries were not law-trained; they were barely literate hacks who wrapped the simplest transactions in mountains of legal jargon, since they were paid by the line.204

After the fall of the western Empire and the onset of the Dark Ages, the legal profession of Western Europe collapsed. As James Brundage has explained: "[by 1140], no one in Western Europe could properly be described as a professional lawyer or a professional canonist in anything like the modern sense of the term 'professional.' "205 However, from 1150 onward, a small but increasing number of men became experts in canon law but only in furtherance of other occupational goals, such as serving the Roman Catholic Church as priests.206 From 1190 to 1230, however, there was a crucial shift in which some men began to practice canon law as a lifelong profession in itself.207

The legal profession's return was marked by the renewed efforts of church and state to regulate it. In 1231 two French councils mandated that lawyers had to swear an oath of admission before practicing before the bishop's courts in their regions, and a similar oath was promulgated by the papal legate in London in 1237.208 During the same decade, Frederick II, the emperor of the Kingdom of Sicily, imposed a similar oath in his civil courts.209 By 1250 the nucleus of a new legal profession had clearly formed.210 The new trend towards professionalization culminated in a controversial proposal at the Second Council of Lyon in 1275 that ecclesiastical courts should require an oath of admission.211 Although not adopted by the council, it was highly influential in many such courts throughout Europe.212 The civil courts in England also joined the trend towards professionalization; in 1275 a statute was enacted that prescribed punishment for professional lawyers guilty of deceit, and in 1280 the mayor's court of the city of London promulgated regulations concerning admission procedures, including the administering of an oath.213

John Bruce "Jack" Thompson (born July 25, 1951) is an American activist and former attorney, based in Coral Gables, Florida. Thompson, a Christian conservative,1 is known for his public advocacy of conservative Christian moral standards. He is also known for his role as an anti-video-game activist.234

After a foray into politics, Thompson concentrated his legal efforts against perceived obscenity, particularly in rap music and broadcasts by radio personality Howard Stern. More recently, he has focused on violence, particularly in the content of computer and video games and their alleged effects on children.5 Thompson is a vocal advocate of banning stylized violence in video games, a role for which he became known in 1997 while representing the parents of the three students killed in the Heath High School shooting.

Thompson's involvement with music, gaming, and the media (and especially use of legal threats) has raised questions about First Amendment rights. On September 25, 2008, Thompson was permanently disbarred by the Florida Supreme Court for inappropriate conduct, effective October 25, 2008.67

Thompson grew up in Cleveland, Ohio, and attended Denison University. He received media attention when he hosted his own political talk show on the college radio station.8 He went to law school at Vanderbilt University, where he met his wife, Patricia.9 In 1976 they moved to Florida, where Thompson, working as a lawyer and then a fund-raiser for a Christian ministry,9 began attending the Key Biscayne Presbyterian Church and became a born-again Christian.8 Thompson admits to having a "colorful disciplinary history" as an attorney.10

Thompson first met Janet Reno in November 1975, when he applied for a job as an assistant State's Attorney in Dade County, but was not hired.11 In 1988, he ran for prosecutor against then incumbent Dade County State Attorney Janet Reno. At the time, Thompson was involved in a feud with WIOD Radio host Neil Rogers, and Reno had declined his request to prosecute Rogers.12 Thompson was instrumental in persuading the FCC to fine WIOD $10,000 for airing such parody songs as "Boys Like Sex in the Morning" on Rogers' show.8 Thompson also sued the station for violating a December 1987 agreement to end on-air harassment against him. Thompson had complained to the station after Rogers solicited homosexuals to join Thompson on his vacation; Rogers aired Thompson’s address and phone number. For the next eight months, Thompson recorded all of Rogers' broadcasts and documented 40,000 mentionings of his name. Thompson claimed that one of the terms of his agreement with the station was that the station would pay him $5,000 each time his name was mentioned, totaling $200 million in the suit.13

Thompson gave Reno a letter at a campaign event requesting that she check a box to indicate whether she was homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual. Thompson said that Reno then put her hand on his shoulder and responded, "I'm only interested in virile men. That’s why I'm not attracted to you."1415 He filed a police report accusing her of battery for touching him. In response, Reno asked Florida governor Bob Martinez to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate.16 The special prosecutor rejected the charge, concluding that it was "a political ploy." Reno was ultimately re-elected with 69% of the vote. Thompson repeated allegations that Reno was a lesbian when she was nominated as U.S. Attorney General, leading one of her supporters, lieutenant governor Buddy MacKay, to dismiss him as a "kook."14

In 1990, after his election loss, Thompson began a campaign against the efforts of Switchboard of Miami, a social services group of which Reno was a board member. Thompson charged that the group placed "homosexual-education tapes" in public schools. Switchboard responded by getting the Florida Supreme Court to order that he submit to a psychiatric examination. Thompson did so and passed. Thompson has since stated on more than one occasion that he is "the only officially certified sane lawyer in the entire state of Florida."17

Thompson came to national prominence in the controversy over 2 Live Crew's album. (Luke Skyywalker Records, the company of 2 Live Crew's Luther Campbell, had previously released a record supporting Reno in her race against Thompson.)18 On January 1, 1990, he wrote to Martinez and Reno asking them to investigate whether the album violated Florida obscenity laws. Although the state prosecutor declined to proceed with an investigation, Thompson pushed local officials in various parts of the state to block sales of the album, along with N.W.A’s .19 In sending documents to opponents, Thompson would frequently attach a photocopy of his driver's license, with a photo of Batman pasted over his own, just to make sure they knew who they were dealing with. Thompson said, "I have sent my opponents pictures of Batman to remind them I'm playing the role of Batman. Just like Bruce Wayne helped the police in the movie, I have had to assist the sheriff of Broward County." He also wore a Batman wristwatch.20 Thompson compared Campbell to the Joker.21 Thompson also said, "I understand as well as anybody that the First Amendment is a cornerstone of a free society—but there is a responsibility to people who can be harmed by words and thoughts, one of which is the message from Campbell that women can be sexually abused."8

Thompson also took issue with another 2 Live Crew song, . Thompson sent a letter to Jon Landau, manager of Bruce Springsteen, whose song was to be sampled by the group. Thompson suggested that Landau "protect from its apparent theft by a bunch of clowns who traffic toxic waste to kids," or else Thompson would "be telling the nation about Mr. Springsteen's tacit approval" of the song, which, according to Campbell, "expresses anger about the failure of the First Amendment to protect 2 Live Crew from prosecution."22 Thompson also said, "the 'social commentary' on this album is akin to a sociopath's discharging his AK-47 into a crowded schoolyard, with the machine gun bursts interrupted by Pee Wee Herman's views on politics."23

The members of 2 Live Crew responded to these efforts by suing the Broward County sheriff in federal district court. The sheriff had previously told local retailers that selling the album could result in a prosecution for obscenity violations. While they were granted an injunction because law enforcement actions were an unconstitutional prior restraint on free speech, the court ruled that the album was in fact obscene. However, an appellate court reversed the obscenity ruling, because simply playing the tape was insufficient evidence of the constitutional requirement that it had no artistic value.24

As the debate continued, Thompson wrote, "An industry that says a line cannot be drawn will be drawn and quartered."25 He said of his campaign, "I won't stop till I get the head of a record company or record chain in jail. Only then will they stop trafficking in obscenity."26 Bob Guccione Jr., founder of magazine, responded by calling Thompson "a sort of latter-day Don Quixote, as equally at odds with his times as that mythical character was," and argued that his campaign was achieving "two things...: pissing everybody off and compounding his own celebrity."27 Thompson responded by noting, "Law enforcement and I put 2 Live Crew's career back into the toilet where it began."28

Thompson wrote another letter in 1991, this time to the Minnesota attorney general Hubert H. Humphrey III, complaining about the N.W.A album . Humphrey warned locally-based Musicland that sales of the album might violate state law against distribution of sexually explicit material harmful to minors. Humphrey also referred the matter to the Minneapolis city attorney, who concluded that some of the songs might fit the legal definition if issued as singles, but that sales of the album as a whole were not prosecutable.29 Thompson also initiated a similar campaign in Boston.30 Later, Thompson would criticize the Republican Party for inviting N.W.A member and party donor Eric "Eazy-E" Wright to an exclusive function.31

In 1992, Thompson was hired by the Freedom Alliance, a self-described patriot group founded by Oliver North, described as "far-right" by the Washington Post. By this time, Thompson was looking to have Time Warner, then being criticized for promoting the Ice-T song , prosecuted for federal and state crimes such as sedition, incitement to riot, and "advocating overthrow of government" by distributing material that, in Thompson's view, advocated the killing of police officers.32 Time Warner eventually released Ice-T and his band from their contract, and voluntarily suspended distribution of the album on which was featured.

Thompson’s push to label various musical performances obscene was not entirely limited to rap. In addition to taking on 2 Live Crew, Thompson campaigned against sales of the racy music video for Madonna's .33 Then in 1996, he took on MTV broadcasts for "objectification of women" by writing to the station's corporate parent, Viacom, demanding a stop to what he called "corporate pollution."34 He also went after MTV's advertisers and urged the U.S. Army to pull recruiting commercials, citing the Army’s recruitment of women and problems with sexual harassment scandals.35

More recently, Thompson has heavily criticized a number of video games and campaigned against their producers and distributors. His basic argument is that violent video games have repeatedly been used by teenagers as "murder simulators" to rehearse violent plans. He has pointed to alleged connections between such games and a number of school massacres. According to Thompson, "In every school shooting, we find that kids who pull the trigger are video gamers."36 Also, he claims that scientific studies show teenagers process the game environment differently from adults, leading to increased violence and copycat behavior.3738 According to Thompson, "If some wacked-out adult wants to spend his time playing , one has to wonder why he doesn't get a life, but when it comes to kids, it has a demonstrable impact on their behavior and the development of the frontal lobes of their brain."39 Thompson has described the proliferation of games by Sony, a Japanese company, as "Pearl Harbor 2."40 According to Thompson, "Many parents think that stores won’t sell an M-rated game to someone under 17. We know that's not true, and, in fact, kids roughly 50 percent of that time, all the studies show, are able to walk into any store and get any game regardless of the rating, no questions asked."41

Thompson has rejected arguments that such video games are protected by freedom of expression, saying, "Murder simulators are not constitutionally protected speech. They’re not even speech. They’re dangerous physical appliances that teach a kid how to kill efficiently and to love it," as well as simply calling video games "mental masturbation".42 In addition, he has attributed part of the impetus for violent games to the military, saying that it was looking "for a way to disconnect in the soldier's mind the physical act of pulling the trigger from the awful reality that a life may end."43 Thompson further claims that some of these games are based on military training and simulation technologies, such as those being developed at the Institute for Creative Technologies, which, he suggests, were created by the Department of Defense to help overcome soldiers' inhibition to kill.44 He also claims that the PlayStation 2's DualShock controller "gives you a pleasurable buzz back into your hands with each kill. This is operant conditioning, behavior modification right out of B. F. Skinner's laboratory."45

Thompson filed a lawsuit on behalf of the parents of three children killed in the Heath High School shooting in 1997. Investigations showed that the perpetrator, 14-year-old Michael Carneal, had regularly played various computer games (including , , , , , , and ) and accessed some pornographic websites. Carneal had also owned a videotape of , which includes a high school student dreaming about shooting his teacher and some classmates. The suit sought $33 million in damages, alleging that the producers of the games, the movie, and the operators of the Internet sites were negligent in distributing this material to a minor because it would desensitize him and make him more prone to violence. Additional claims included product liability for making "defective" products (the defects alleged were violent features and lack of warnings) and violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act for distributing this material to minors.46 Said Thompson, "We intend to hurt Hollywood. We intend to hurt the video game industry. We intend to hurt the sex porn sites."47

The suit was filed in federal district court and was dismissed for failing to present a legally recognizable claim. The court concluded that Carneal's actions were not reasonably foreseeable by the defendants and that in any case, his actions superseded those of the defendants, so that the latter could not be the proximate cause of the harm. In addition, the judge determined that "thoughts, ideas and images" in the defendants' materials did not constitute "products" that could be considered defective.46 The ruling was upheld on appeal.48

In February 2003, Thompson asked permission to file an (or "friend of the court") brief in the Ohio case of Dustin Lynch, 16, who was charged with aggravated murder in the slaying of JoLynn Mishne; Lynch was "obsessed" with .49 When Judge John Lohn ruled that Lynch would be tried as an adult, Thompson passed a message from Mishne's father to the judge, asserting that "the attorneys had better tell the jury about the violent video game that trained this kid [and] showed him how to kill our daughter, JoLynn. If they don't, I will.”50 In a motion sent to the prosecutor, the boy's court-appointed lawyer, and to reporters, Thompson asked to be recognized as the boy's lawyer in the case. However, Medina County Prosecutor Dean Holman said Thompson would be faced with deeply conflicting interests if he were to represent Dustin Lynch because he also advised Mishne's parents.51 Claiming that delays had weakened his case, Jack Thompson asked Medina County Common Pleas Judge Christopher Collier to disqualify himself from presiding over the case because the judge had not ruled on Thompson's request for two months.52 Lynch himself eventually rejected Thompson's offer, withdrawing his insanity plea. Lynch's mother, Jerrilyn Thomas, who previously demanded that Judge Christopher Collier appoint Thompson to defend her son, said she changed her mind after visiting with her boy in jail, saying, "It has nothing to do with video games or Paxil, and my son's no murderer."53

Thompson returned to file a lawsuit in Tennessee state court in October 2003 on behalf of the victims of two teenage stepbrothers who had pled guilty to reckless homicide, endangerment, and assault.54 Since the boys told investigators they were inspired by , Thompson sought $246 million in damages from the publisher, Take-Two Interactive, along with PlayStation 2 maker Sony Computer Entertainment America and retailer Wal-Mart. The suit charged that the defendants knew or should have known that the game would cause copycat violence.55 On October 22, 2003, the case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. Two days later, the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, and the case was closed.56

Thompson was involved in another similar suit in Alabama in 2005 on behalf of the families of police personnel killed by Devin Moore, a teenager who was reportedly a compulsive player. However, his participation in the case ran into a dispute over his pro hac vice admission to practice law in that state. The opposing attorneys sought removal of this privilege by arguing that his conduct was unethical and claiming he had threatened and harassed them in letters and emails.57 The judge added that Thompson had violated his gag order during Moore’s criminal trial. Thompson tried to withdraw from the case, but his request was denied by the judge, who went ahead and revoked Thompson's temporary admission to the state bar. For his part, Thompson said he thought the judge was trying to protect Moore's criminal conviction at any cost.58 He also complained about the judge's ethics, saying a local attorney who claimed to have influence on the judge had assured him the case would be dismissed unless the attorney was on Thompson's team,59 and also claimed that Rockstar Entertainment and Take Two Interactive posted slanderous comments about him on their website.60

In the aftermath of this lawsuit, Thompson lobbied Alabama attorney general Troy King to file a civil suit and call on retailers not to sell "cop-killing games."10 After the slaying of another police officer in Gassville, Arkansas by Jacob D. Robida, an 18-year-old fugitive, Thompson again raised the possibility of a connection to , but investigators found no evidence that video games were involved.61

Thompson once reported that he had videotaped a Miami Best Buy selling a copy of to his son who was 10 at the time. In a letter to Best Buy, he wrote, "Prosecutions and public relations consequences should fall on your Minneapolis headquarters like snowflakes."62 He eventually sued the company in Florida, arguing that it had violated a law against sale of sexual materials deemed harmful to minors. In January 2005, Best Buy agreed that it would enforce an existing policy to check the identification of anyone who appeared to be 17 or under and tried to purchase games rated "M" (for mature audiences).63 No law in effect at the time prohibited selling "M" rated video games to juveniles.

In September 2006, Thompson filed a suit in Albuquerque, New Mexico against Sony, Take-Two, Rockstar Games, and Cody Posey, for the wrongful death of three members of Posey's family. The 69-page complaint filed by Thompson and Albuquerque attorney Steven Sanders argued that "obsessively" playing made violence "pleasurable and attractive," disconnected violence from consequences, and caused Posey to "act out, copycat, replicate and emulate the violence" when he shot and killed his father, stepmother, and stepsister, and then buried them under a manure pile at a ranch owned by former ABC News reporter Sam Donaldson in July, 2004. Thompson and Sanders filed the lawsuit on behalf of the surviving family members of Posey's father. According to Thompson, "Posey essentially practiced how to kill on this game. If it wasn't for , three people might not now be dead."64 The lawsuit claims that Thompson was told by a sheriff's deputy that the game and a Sony PlayStation 2 were found at the ranch. The suit also claims that the game taught Posey "how to point and shoot a gun in a fashion making him an extraordinarily effective killer without teaching him any of the constraints or responsibilities needed to inhibit such a killing capacity."65 Gary Mitchell, Posey's criminal defense attorney, said Thompson contacted him "numerous times" before the trial, urging Mitchell to highlight the game in Posey's defense, but Mitchell said he "just didn't find it had any merit whatsoever."66

On March 14, 2007 Take-Two filed a lawsuit to prevent Thompson from preventing the sale of and to minors, claiming that Thompson's effort to block sales of its games through lawsuits violates the company's First Amendment rights.67 Responding, Thompson said, "I have been praying, literally, that Take-Two and its lawyers would do something so stupid, so arrogant, so dumb, even dumber than what they have to date done, that such a misstep would enable me to destroy Take-Two."68 On April 19, 2007, Thompson and Take-Two settled their suit, with Thompson agreeing not to restrict sales through any court worldwide of Take-Two's games, threaten to sue the company, or accuse Take-Two of any wrongdoing based on the sale of any of its games. One analyst said that the settlement was likely to mute his public pronouncements and lawsuits against the company.69 However, upon the game's 2008 release, Thompson called the game "the gravest assault upon children in this country since polio," and asked Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty to "pursue and file criminal charges against [Minnesota-based retailers] Target and Best Buy."70 He also sent a letter to Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick's attorney, addressed to Zelnick's mother, in which Thompson accused her son of "doing everything he possibly can to sell as many copies of GTA: IV to teen boys in the United States, a country in which your son claims you raised him to be a 'a Boy Scout'. ... More like the Hitler Youth, I would say."71 On May 1, 2008 Thompson appeared on the CNN Headline News program , asserting that the game's sexual content made its sale to minors illegal, and that he was working with law enforcement to have criminal prosecutions brought.72 Thompson also filed a complaint with the Chicago Transit Authority about poster ads for the game at Chicago, Illinois bus stops.73

Beginning in 2005, Thompson supported a campaign to discourage Take-Two’s subsidiary, Rockstar Games, from releasing a game called , in which, according to Thompson, "what you are in effect doing is rehearsing your physical revenge and violence against those whom you have been victimized by. And then you, like Klebold and Harris in Columbine, become the ultimate bully."74 According to Thompson, the game "shows you how to — by bullying — take over your school. You punch people; you hit them with sling shots; you dunk their heads in dirty toilets. There's white-on-black crime in the game. You bludgeon teachers and classmates with bats. It's absolutely nuts."75 Thompson sued Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Target, Circuit City, GameStop, and Toys 'R' Us, seeking an order to bar the game’s release.76 He also participated in a protest at Rockstar's office that also included students from Peaceaholics, a Washington, D.C. mentoring organization. 77 Thompson said he hoped that the pressure would get retailers to refuse to carry the game.78 In March 2006, a Florida school board he had lobbied passed a resolution criticizing the game, but only urged retailers not to sell the game to minors.79

Thompson also criticized Bill Gates and Microsoft for contracting with Rockstar Games to release the game on the Xbox.37 The Xbox version has since been canceled for undisclosed reasons, but a version was released on the Xbox 360. In August 2006, Thompson requested a congressional subpoena for an early copy, threatening to file suit in Miami if he did not gain help from U.S. Rep. Cliff Stearns. Once the game is out, according to Thompson, "the horse will be out of the barn and it will be too late to do anything about it." Thompson argued that it violated Florida's public nuisance laws, which prohibit activities that can injure the health of the community.80

Rockstar Games co-founder Terry Donavan responded, saying "I would prefer it if we could simply make great games and not have to deal with misunderstanding and misperception of what we do."68 After receiving no response from Rockstar regarding an advance copy, Thompson filed the public nuisance complaint against Wal-Mart, Take-Two Interactive, and GameStop, demanding that he be allowed to preview the game before its October 17 release date. Take-Two offered to bring in a copy and let both the judge and Thompson view the game in the judge's chambers on October 12, 2006.81 The judge ultimately saw no reason to restrict sales and dismissed the complaint the next day.82

Thompson was critical of the judge's decision, telling the judge "You did not see the game... You don't even know what it was you saw," as well as accusing the Take-Two employee who demonstrated the game of avoiding the most violent parts.83 Blank Rome subsequently filed a motion to have Thompson's behavior declared "contempt for the court". Judge Friedman then recused himself from ruling, and instead filed a complaint against Thompson with the Florida Bar, calling Thompson's behavior "inappropriate by a member of the bar, unprofessional and contemptible".84

Thompson later drew attention to the game's main character, a 15-year old male, being able to kiss other boys. Thompson wrote to ESRB president Patricia Vance, "We just found gay sexual content in as Jimmy Hopkins makes out with another male student. Good luck with your Teen rating now." The ESRB indicated that they knew the content was in the game when they rated the game.85

In October 2006, Thompson sent a letter to Midway Games, demanding they cease and desist selling the latest game in the series, , claiming that the game was illegally profiting on his likeness, because gamers could use the Kreate a Fighter option to make a character who looked like Jack Thompson.85 Midway has not ceased distribution of the game.

In December 2007, Thompson filed suit against Omaha, Nebraska Police Chief Thomas Warren, asking him to produce information on all "violent entertainment material" belonging to Robert Hawkins, who killed nine people, including himself, in a shooting at the Westroads Mall earlier that month. According to Omaha police, such information is not a matter of public record, as it is part of an ongoing criminal investigation.86

In addition to filing lawsuits, Thompson has pushed for measures against similar games in a variety of public settings. He wrote a joint article in the with Eugene F. Provenzo, a University of Miami professor who studies the effects of video games on children. Originally brought together to provide opposing viewpoints on in the aftermath of the Columbine High School massacre, they said they had become friends and were collaborating on a book. They described themselves as having "a shared belief that first-person shooter video games are bad for our children, teaching them to act aggressively and providing them with efficient killing skills and romanticized and trivialized scenarios for killing in the real world".1

Thompson has supported legislation in a number of states that would ban sales of violent and sexually explicit video games to minors.63 In response to First Amendment concerns, he argued that the games were a "public safety hazard."87 However, he rejected as "completely unconstitutional" Hillary Clinton's proposed legislation to ban sales to minors of games rated "M" for Mature by the Entertainment Software Rating Board. Thompson contended that the government could not enforce a private-sector standard but had to depend on a obscenity test. He charged that Clinton was simply positioning herself politically, with the support of the gaming industry, by proposing a bill which he felt she knew would be unconstitutional.88

In July 2005, Thompson sent a letter to several politicians urging them to investigate , alleging that the game contained nudity accessible by entering special codes. Thompson called the nudity inappropriate for a game rated "T" for Teen, a rating which indicates suitability for anyone 13 and older. Manufacturer Electronic Arts dismissed the allegations, with vice president Jeff Brown explaining that game characters have "no anatomical detail" under their clothes, effectively resembling Barbie dolls. Although the game does display blurred-out patches over body regions when characters are naked, such as when taking a shower, Brown said that was for "humorous effect" and denied there was anything improper about the game.89 Nevertheless, a command that could be entered into the in-game console in order to disable the blur effect was removed from the game in an expansion. No official reason was given for the change.

In Louisiana, Thompson helped draft a 2006 bill sponsored by state representative Roy Burrell to ban the sale of violent video games to buyers under 18 (HB1381). In an effort to avoid constitutional problems, it avoided trying to define "violent" and instead adopted a variation of the obscenity test: sales to minors would be illegal based on community standards if the game appealed to "the minor's morbid interest in violence", was patently offensive based on adult standards of suitability for minors, and lacked serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors. The bill was passed unanimously by the state House and approved by the Senate Judiciary A Committee, despite industry opposition and predictions that it too would be unconstitutional.90 editorialized that Thompson's support of the bill "should immediately set off alarms" and described Thompson as someone who "thrives on chasing cultural ambulances".91 In defense of the bill, Thompson said that it was needed for public safety, and that it was a "miracle" that a Columbine-type event hadn't happened yet in Louisiana.92 However, the ESA filed suit under , and U.S. District Judge James Brady issued a preliminary injunction, temporarily blocking the law from taking effect until full judicial review can be done.93 The law was permanently enjoined in late November 2006, and the state was ordered to pay the defense's attorney fees. Judge Brady was "dumbfounded" that state legislators and Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco wasted taxpayer money by trying to enact the law.94

At one point, Thompson was asked by the National Institute on Media and the Family to stop invoking the organization's name in his campaigns. NIMF president David Walsh felt Thompson cast the organization in a bad light whenever he brought up their name. "Your commentary has included extreme hyperbole and your tactics have included personally attacking iniduals for whom I have a great deal of respect," Walsh said in an open letter to Thompson.95

Thompson has additionally worked to influence police investigations concerning violent acts which he views as being connected to violence in video games media. On June 2, 2006, Thompson suggested that West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana police detectives, investigating the murder of 55-year-old Michael Gore by 17-year-old Kurt Edward Neher, should look into the video games played by Neher. According to Sheriff J. Austin Daniel, an autopsy showed Gore was beaten to death as well as shot in the face. Concerning this, Thompson stated that "nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you're a hit man or a video gamer."96

Thompson predicted that the perpetrator of the Beltway sniper attacks would be "a teenaged boy, who plays video games" and speculated incorrectly that he "may indeed ride a bicycle to and from his shooting locations, his gun broken down and placed in a backpack while he pedals."97 Saying that the shooter, Lee Boyd Malvo, had "trained" on , Thompson later claimed credit for this on : "I predicted that the beltway sniper would be a teen-aged boy that trained on a game switched to sniper mode. And three months later, NBC reported that that's exactly what Malvo did. And Muhammed had him train on the game to suppress his inhibition to kill."9899 John Muhammad was a Gulf War veteran and earned an expert marksmanship badge in the U.S. Army.100

Thompson has also criticized a Christian video game based on the series. In , players participate in "battles raging in the streets of New York," according to the game's fact sheet. They engage in "physical and spiritual warfare: using the power of prayer to strengthen your troops in combat and wield modern military weaponry throughout the game world." Thompson claims that the makers of the game are sacrificing their values.101 He said, "Because of the Christian context, somehow it's OK? It's not OK. The context is irrelevant. It's a mass-killing game."102 author Tim LaHaye disagrees, saying "Rather than forbid young people from viewing their favorite pastime, I prefer to give them something that's positive."101 The dispute over the game has caused Thompson to sever ties with Tyndale House, which publishes both the books and Thompson's book, .102 Thompson has not seen the game, which he says has "personally broken my heart," but claims, "I don't have to meet Abraham Lincoln to know that he was the 16th president of the United States."103

In April 2007, only hours after the Virginia Tech shooting (and before Seung-Hui Cho was actually identified), Thompson predicted that the shooter had trained on the game .42 According to Thompson, the game "drills you and gives you scenarios on how to kill them [and] gets you to kill them with your heart rate lower." He says that Seung-Hui "was in a hyper-reality situation in virtual reality." Though Seung-Hui had last been known to have played in high school, four years prior to the shooting, Thompson asserts that "you don't drop it when you go to college, typically." Thompson disputed Seung-Hui's roommate's claim that Seung-Hui only used his computer to write fiction, on the grounds that "Cho was able to go room to room calmly, efficiently, coolly killing people."104 Prior to being identified, Thompson attributed the "flat effect [] on [Seung-Hui's] face" and the efficiency of his attack to video game rehearsals of the shooting.105 However, a search warrant released, listing the items found in Cho's dorm room, did not contain any video games, and a story cited by Thompson later removed a paragraph stating that Seung-Hui enjoyed violent video games in high school. Thompson continued to maintain that "this is not rocket science. When a kid who has never killed anyone in his life goes on a rampage and looks like the Terminator, he's a video gamer." Thompson also sent a letter to Bill Gates, saying, "Mr. Gates, your company is potentially legally liable (for) the harm done at Virginia Tech. Your game, a killing simulator, according to the news that used to be in the Post, trained him to enjoy killing and how to kill." However, Microsoft did not create - they only published the Xbox version of the game.42 The official Virginia state panel commissioned to investigate the shooting determined that Seung-Hui "played video games like Sonic the Hedgehog," and that "none of the video games [he had played] were war games or had violent themes."106

On February 15, 2008, Jack Thompson claimed that the actions of Steven Kazmierczak, who killed five people at Northern Illinois University before committing suicide, were influenced by the game .107 In a subsequent news release, Thompson claimed that "We have a nation of Manchurian Candidate video gamers out there who are ready, willing, and able to massacre, and some of them will."108 Thompson also threatened the university with a lawsuit if the school did not provide copies of "all documents that reveal [Kazmierczak's] play of violent videogames."109

Thompson's "high-profile crusades" have made him an enemy of video game aficionados.64 On occasion, Thompson has sparred directly with the gaming industry and its fans. In 2005, he wrote an open letter to Entertainment Software Association president Doug Lowenstein, making what he described as a "a modest video game proposal" (an allusion to the title of Jonathan Swift's satirical essay, ) to the video game industry: Thompson said he would donate $10,000 to a charity designated by Take-Two CEO Paul Eibeler if any video game company would create a game including the scenario he described in the letter. The scenario called for the main character, whose son was killed by a boy who played violent video games, to murder a number of industry executives (including one modeled on Eibeler) and go on a killing spree at the Electronic Entertainment Expo. Video game fans promptly began working to take Thompson up on his offer, resulting in the game , among others. Afterwards, he claimed that his proposal was satire, and to date he has not made his proposed donation.

In response, Jerry Holkins and Mike Krahulik, the creators of gaming webcomic and of the children's charity Child's Play, stepped in to make the donation instead, writing in the memo field of their check, "For Jack Thompson, Because Jack Thompson Won't." Afterwards, Thompson tried to get Seattle police and the FBI to investigate Holkins and Krahulik for orchestrating "criminal harassment" of him through articles on their site.110111 Other webcomics have regularly incorporated references to Thompson, alluding to this incident as well as others.112

In 2006, two Michigan gamers began a project dubbed "Flowers for Jack", soliciting donations to deliver a massive floral arrangement to Thompson’s office. The flowers were delivered in February along with a letter aimed at opening a dialogue between Thompson and the video gaming community. Thompson rejected this overture and forwarded the flowers to some of his industry foes, with such comments as "Discard them along with the decency you discarded long ago. I really don't care. Grind them up and smoke them if you like."113

Gamers have responded to Thompson's attempt to link the Virginia Tech massacre to the game . Video game Web sites and young gamers on Internet message boards "teemed with anger" at what reporter Peter Hartlaub called "his serial misstatements," in some cases linking to YouTube videos of Thompson and dissecting his claims point by point.114 Jason Della Rocca, executive director of the International Game Developers Association, said, "It's so sad. These massacre chasers—they're worse than ambulance chasers—they're waiting for these things to happen so they can jump on their soapbox."42 In response, Thompson referred to Della Rocca as an "idiot" and a "jackass [...] paid not to connect the dots [connecting shootings to video games]," and compared himself to people who warned that the government should be more concerned about terrorism before the September 11, 2001 attacks.115 According to Della Rocca, Thompson then challenged him to a series of gaming debates, claiming that they could each make more than $3,000 per event. When Della Rocca suggested that neither he nor Thompson accept any money for the events, Thompson refused.108

In 2004, Thompson helped get Howard Stern's show taken off a radio station in Orlando, Florida by filing a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission. Thompson objected to Stern’s use of obscenities on the air. He argued that "Either broadcasters will accept the light harness of decency that has been the law for decades and start cleaning up their acts, or the public's deepening outrage will foster a more fearsome governmental response."116 Thompson claimed to have received death threats from listeners of Stern's show, noting that "you'd expect that considering the IQ of people who listen to Howard Stern. Apparently they fail to realize that I might have caller ID."117

During his opposition to Howard Stern, Thompson was asked in an interview with a reporter if, by his standards, he would blame Christianity for the murders committed by Michael Hernandez, a fourteen year old who murdered one of his classmates in 2004, because Hernandez wrote a diary in which he constantly spoke about praying to God. Thompson replied, "The Bible doesn't promote killing innocent people, does. Islam does." Thompson then expanded his comments in the same interview by saying, "Islam promotes the killing of innocent people. The Quran requires the infidel, whether Jew or Christian, to be killed. ... That's a core essence of the religion. ... Muhammad was a pirate who killed infidels and who advocated the killing of infidels - not a nice guy. Osama bin Laden is in keeping with his fine tradition."117

He later spoke in defense of Stern during the latter’s legal dispute with CBS over promoting Sirius on-air before his switch to satellite radio. Thompson contended that the technology added by CBS to edit out profanity also could have worked to edit out Stern's references to Sirius.118 According to Thompson, "The reason why CBS chose not to edit Stern is that Stern's Arbitron ratings remained high and were arguably even enhanced by people tuning in to hear daily about Stern's running feud with CBS and his move to Sirius. In other words, CBS actually used Stern's discussion of his move to Sirius to make more money for CBS."119

CBS President Leslie Moonves responded, saying "You know what? You can’t let people like that tell you what to put on the air or what not to put on the air. That would only open the door when suddenly next week, he says, 'Take David Letterman off the air or take off the air.' Or you know what? was about, you know, sex last week or about a 70-year-old man—you know, we dealt with Peter Boyle having sex with Doris Roberts. 'Take that off the air.' That's something we can’t let happen."120

In 1992, Thompson asked a Florida judge to declare the Florida Bar Association unconstitutional. He said that the bar was engaged in a vendetta against him because of his religious beliefs, which he said conflicted with what he called the bar's pro-gay, humanist, liberal agenda. He also said that the "wedding of all three functions of government into the Florida Bar, the 'official arm' of the Florida Supreme Court, is violative of the bedrock constitutional requirement of the separation powers and the 'checks and balances' which the separation guarantees."121 Thompson accepted a $20,000 out-of-court settlement.122

On January 7, 2002, Thompson sent the Supreme Court of Florida a letter regarding the Florida Bar's actions. The letter was filed with the court on January 10, 2002 and was treated as a petition for a writ of mandamus against the Florida Bar.123 Before any action was taken on the petition, Thompson sent the court another letter on January 28, 2002 voluntarily dismissing the case. The letter was filed with the court on January 30, 2002, and the Florida Supreme Court issued an order of dismissal on February 28, 2002.124

In January 2006, Thompson asked the Justice Department to investigate the Florida Bar's actions. "The Florida Bar and its agents have engaged in a documented pattern of this illegal activity, which may sink to the level of criminal racketeering activity, in a knowing and illegal effort to chill my federal First Amendment rights," Thompson wrote in a letter to Alex Acosta, interim U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida.125

In April 2006, Thompson filed another suit against the Florida Bar, this time in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, alleging that the Bar harassed him by investigating what he called baseless complaints made by disgruntled opponents in previous disputes. His five-count complaint asked for more than $1 million in damages. The lawsuit alleged that the Bar was pursuing baseless ethics complaints brought against Thompson by Tew Cardenas attorneys Lawrence Kellogg and Alberto Cardenas of Miami, and by two lawyers from the Philadelphia office of Blank Rome, in violation of Thompson's constitutional rights. According to the lawsuit, the Bar looked at Thompson for violations of a bar rule that prohibits attorneys from making disparaging remarks about judges, other attorneys, or court personnel. Thompson also filed a motion with the court to order the mediation of his dispute with the Bar. Thompson commented, "I enjoy doing what I do and I think I've got a First Amendment right to annoy people and participate in the public square in the cultural war." Thompson also said he is optimistic his federal lawsuit will be successful. "I'm 100 percent certain that it will effect change, otherwise I would not have filed it."125

On April 25, 2006, the Florida Bar filed a motion to dismiss Thompson's complaint. The Bar argued that Thompson's complaint should be dismissed for a number of reasons, including the fact that the complaint failed to state a claim on which he could be granted relief. The Bar also argued that it was absolutely immune from liability for actions arising out of its disciplinary functions, that the Eleventh Amendment barred Thompson's recovery of damages, and that the court should dismiss the case pursuant to the abstention doctrine of . On May 4, 2006, Thompson filed a motion asking Judge Frederico Moreno to recuse himself from the case, as Judge Moreno was a member of the Florida Bar. Citing an "abundance of caution," Judge Moreno recused himself on May 9, 2006 and referred the case to Chief Judge William Zloch for further action. Thompson did not, however, respond to the Bar's motion to dismiss the case. Finally, on May 17, 2006, Thompson filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with the court, and the case was dismissed without prejudice.126

In October 2007, Chief U.S. District Judge Federico Moreno sealed court documents submitted by Thompson in the Florida Bar case that depicted "gay sex acts." Thompson's submission prompted U.S. District Judge Adalberto Jordan on to order Thompson to show cause why his actions should not be filed as a grievance with the court's Ad Hoc Committee on Attorney Admissions, Peer Review and Attorney Grievance, but the order was dismissed after Thompson promised not to file any more pornography. Thompson then sent letters to acting U.S. Attorney General Peter Keisler and U.S. Senators Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter demanding that Jordan be removed from his position for failing to prosecute Florida attorney Norm Kent, who Thompson claimed had "collaborated" with the Bar for 20 years to discipline him.127

In February 2008, The Florida Supreme Court ordered Thompson to show cause as to why it should not reject future court filings from him unless they are signed by another Florida Bar member. The Florida Supreme Court described his filings as "repetitive, frivolous and insult[ing to] the integrity of the court," particularly one in which Thompson, claiming concern about "the court's inability to comprehend his arguments," filed a motion including images of "swastikas, kangaroos in court, a reproduced dollar bill, cartoon squirrels, Paul Simon, Paul Newman, Ray Charles, a handprint with the word 'slap' written under it, Bar Governor Benedict P. Kuehne, a baby, Ed Bradley, Jack Nicholson, Justice Clarence Thomas, Julius Caesar, monkeys, [and] a house of cards." Thompson claimed that the order "wildly infringes" on his constitutional rights and was "a brazen attempt" to repeal the First Amendment right to petition the government to redress grievances. In response, he sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, referring to the show-cause order as a criminal act done in retaliation for his seeking relief with the court.128129

On March 20, 2008, the Florida Supreme Court imposed sanctions on Thompson, requiring that any of his future filings in the court be signed by a member of The Florida Bar other than himself. The court noted that Thompson had responded to the show cause order with multiple "rambling, argumentative, and contemptuous" responses that characterized the show cause order as "bizarre" and "idiotic."130

In February 2007, the Florida Bar filed disbarment proceedings against Thompson over allegations of professional misconduct. The action was the result of separate grievances filed by people claiming that Thompson made defamatory, false statements and attempted to humiliate, embarrass, harass or intimidate them.131 According to the complaint, Thompson accused Alberto Cardenas of "distribution of pornography to children," claimed that the Alabama judge presiding over the Devin Moore case "breaks the rules, even the Alabama State Bar Rules, because he thinks that the rules don't apply to him," and sent a letter to Blank Rome's managing partner, saying, "Your law firm has actively and knowingly facilitated by various means the criminal distribution of sexual material to minors." Thompson claims that the complaints violate state religious protections because his advocacy is motivated by his Christian faith.132

In May 2008, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Dava Tunis, after reviewing 2,400 pages of transcripts and 1,700 pages of exhibits, recommended that Thompson be found guilty of 27 of the 31 violations of which he had been accused, including making false statements to tribunals, disparaging and humiliating litigants and other lawyers, and improperly practicing law outside of Florida. Thompson filed a motion with the Florida Supreme Court the day after the report was issued to strike Tunis' recommendations as vague for lack of detail. Previously, Thompson had attempted to have Tunis thrown off his case, and filed a complaint against her with the state Judicial Qualifications Commission, which is responsible for investigating judges.133

On June 4, 2008, prosecutor Sheila Tuma recommended 'enhanced disbarment' for Thompson, saying that Thompson demonstrated continued misconduct, a pattern of misconduct and persistently failed to admit any wrongdoing. Enhanced disbarment lengthens the period before an attorney may reapply for admission to the bar from five years to ten. After being prevented from making a speech to begin the disciplinary hearing, Thompson distributed his written objections to lawyers, a court reporter, and a newspaper reporter, departed the courtroom, and called the proceedings against him a "star chamber" and "kangaroo court."134

On July 10, 2008 Judge Dava Tunis recommended permanent disbarment and a $43,675.35 fine for Thompson to the Florida Supreme Court.135136 The court approved the recommendation and fine on September 25, 2008. Thompson was granted 30 days to clear all his affairs before his disbarment became effective.137 He later filed for an emergency stay of the Florida State Supreme Court's decision with the U.S. District Court. This was denied. In an e-mail to media outlets, Thompson responded to the court's decision by stating, "" He closed the email - in which he included the court ruling - with, ""138139140 Thompson's disbarment took effect on September 25, 2008.141142

In 1992, a complaint from Thompson led Florida Secretary of State Jim Smith to withhold a $25,000 grant to the Miami Film Festival; Thompson claimed that the festival was using state money to show pornographic films.143 In response, Thompson was named an "Art Censor of the Year" by the ACLU.144 The next month, Thompson faced disbarment over allegations that he lied while making accusations against prominent Dade County lawyer Stuart Z Grossman.145 Thompson ultimately admitted violating bar rules of professional conduct, including charges that he contacted people represented by an attorney without first contacting their attorneys, and agreed to pay $3,000146 in fines and receive a public reprimand.147

In 1999, Thompson represented the parents of Bryce Kilduff, an 11-year old boy who committed suicide by hanging himself. Police believed that the death was an accident, and that Kilduff was imitating Kenny, a character from the Comedy Central series , which Bryce, according to his parents, had never watched. Thompson called for Comedy Central to stop marketing the show and toys based on the series to children. "You see, the whole show—thrust of the show is it's—it's cool for kids to act like the characters in .”148

Although his efforts dealing with video games have focused on juveniles, Thompson got involved in a case involving an adult on one occasion in 2004. This was an aggravated murder case against 29-year-old Charles McCoy, Jr., the defendant in a series of highway shootings the previous year around Columbus, Ohio. When McCoy was captured, a game console and a copy of were in his motel room. Although not representing McCoy and over the objections of McCoy's lawyers, Thompson succeeded in getting the court to unseal a search warrant for McCoy's residence. This showed, among other things, the discovery of additional games , , and . However, he was not allowed to present the evidence to McCoy, whose defense team was relying on an insanity defense based on paranoid schizophrenia. In Thompson's estimation, McCoy was the "functional equivalent of a 15-year-old,"39 and "the only thing insane about this case is the (insanity) defense."149

On February 21, 2007, Thompson filed a complaint with the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission against Judge Larry Seidlin, accusing Seidlin of "violating nearly every judicial canon" in conducting a hearing on the disposition of the body of Anna Nicole Smith.150 On June 28, 2007, Thompson filed a complaint with the State Attorney's Office, asking for an investigation and possible prosecution regarding accusations that Seidlin inappropriately accepted expensive gifts.151

In March 2008 Thompson called for the New York State Supreme Court’s Appellate Division to immediately suspend the law license of former state governor Eliot Spitzer, who had resigned from the position amidst reports he was a client of a prostitution ring. Thompson said that the Disciplinary Committee for the Appellate Division's First Department should stop Spitzer from practicing law until the matter was resolved, noting that Spitzer did not claim innocence in his initial public apology.152

• Jack Thompson and the Jacob Robida murders
• Dave Grossman
• GamePolitics.com
• - Thompson is interviewed in the documentary

• . Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2005. ISBN 1-4143-0442-0.

• The Florida Bar's Member page of John Bruce Thompson
• Jack Thompson versus Adam Sessler on G4's
• Jack Thompson vs Paul Levinson on CNBC
• Jack Thompson at the Internet Movie Database