Politicians would appoint NC lawyer discipline board under proposed reforms
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Legislative committee backs shifting disciplinary commission appointments to politicians.
- Proposal allocates 26 slots: House, Senate, governor each 7; chief justice 5.
- State Bar president-elect voted against report, saying more study is needed.
North Carolina’s system for investigating and disciplining lawyers would be overhauled under recommendations formally approved on Wednesday by a legislative committee.
The recommendations, crafted by the State Bar Grievance Review Committee, would allow elected Republicans to appoint a majority of the members of the Disciplinary Hearing Commission, which decides whether and how to punish lawyers accused of ethical violations. Currently, those appointments are mostly made by the State Bar.
The Bar’s president-elect, who serves on the committee, voted against the recommendations on Wednesday.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the State Bar said the organization’s focus was on “fulfilling its duty to protect the public and ensure that lawyers uphold the highest professional standards.”
“We welcome the opportunity to participate in thoughtful, good-faith dialogue with committee members and legislators regarding which recommended reforms will strengthen the system,” the statement continued.
The legislature will consider adopting the reforms during its short session, which begins later this month.
Lawrence Shaheen, one of the committee’s chairs, told The News & Observer that the recommendations were intended to “politics-proof” the disciplinary process by giving the appointments to politicians who can be voted out by the public, rather than Bar members who are elected by attorneys.
“I’m trying to make it so that if the (legislature) shifts — if everything goes Democrat — that Republicans are protected just as much as Democrats are protected from us,” he said. “Because the goal shouldn’t be in any way, shape or form, that anyone walks into those hearings thinking, ‘Oh, God, are they going to vote against me because of who I am, what I’ve said, what I’ve done, and how I’ve been involved politically?’”
Under the committee’s recommendations, the leaders of the state House and Senate as well as the governor would each appoint seven people to the Disciplinary Hearing Commission, while the chief justice of the State Supreme Court would appoint five.
Since the governorship is the only one of those offices currently held by a Democrat, Republicans would end up appointing 19 of the 26 members.
The bulk of the committee’s recommendations were approved last week in a dramatic hearing that resulted in one attendee being escorted out, WRAL reported. Wednesday’s vote formalized the committee’s report and submitted it to the legislature.
State Bar President-Elect Kevin Williams was one of two committee members to vote against the report.
“I would like to see more study and more evidence — more empirical data — upon which we are basing our recommendations,” he said.
Wednesday’s proceedings are the culmination of the committee’s work after it was created in 2023 by the legislature and tasked with reforming the attorney discipline system.
While some of its recommendations have been controversial, others have been adopted with bipartisan approval, such as giving attorneys accused of violations more notice in the disciplinary process.
From the committee’s inception, its chairs have warned of the Bar being used as a “weapon” to “cancel” attorneys its members disagree with or who take unpopular legal stances.
Late last year, the committee requested that the State Bar provide it with a comprehensive list of the political affiliations of the Bar’s employees and leaders, as well as a record of all of their political contributions over the last 13 years.
The Bar denied that request, saying that the responsibilities of its employees were “apolitical.”
This story was originally published April 1, 2026 at 1:56 PM.
