Note that information below is based on the best information reasonably available and may not reflect recent developments. Please be sure to double check before relying on the below.
Alabama (AL): Similar to ABA Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
Alaska (AK): No discrimination rule to report. See state rules.
Arizona (AZ): Similar to ABA Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
Arkansas (AR): Similar to ABA Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
California (CA): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rule.
Colorado (CO) Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g) See state rule.
Connecticut (CT): Similar to ABA Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
Delaware (DE): Similar to ABA Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
Florida (FL): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rule.
Georgia (GA): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rules.
Hawaii (HI): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rules.
Idaho (ID): Similar to ABA Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
Illinois (IL): Some stronger antidiscrimination language. See state rule. Reported that bar association voted against adoption of 8.4(g).
Indiana (IN): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rule.
Iowa (IA): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rule.
Kansas (KS): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state misconduct rule.
Kentucky (KY): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state misconduct rule.
Louisiana (LA): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rules. Reported to have declined to adopt 8.4(g).
Maine (ME): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state misconduct rule.
Maryland (MD): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state misconduct rule.
Massachusetts (MA): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See similar state rule at (i).
Michigan (MI): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rule at 6.5. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
Minnesota (MN): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rules.
Mississippi (MS): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rules.
Missouri (MO): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
Montana (MT): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rules. Reported to have declined to adopt 8.4(g).
Nebraska (NE): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
Nevada (NV): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rules. Reported to have declined to adopt 8.4(g).
New Hampshire (NH): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
New Jersey (NJ): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rules.
New Mexico (NM): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule at 16-300.
New York (NY): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rule.
North Carolina (NC): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rules.
North Dakota (ND): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
Ohio (OH): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rule.
Oklahoma (OK): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rule.
Oregon (OR): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
Pennsylvania (PA): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rule. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
Rhode Island (RI): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
South Carolina (SC): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule. Reported to have declined to adopt 8.4(g).
South Dakota (SD): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
Tennessee (TN): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule. Reported to have declined to adopt 8.4(g).
Texas (TX): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule at 5.08.
Utah (UT): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
Vermont (VT): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(g). See state rule.
Virginia (VA): No similar rule addressing discrimination. See state rule.
Washington (WA): to Model Rule 8.4(g). See state rule.
Washington, DC (DC): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See rule. Reported to be considering an antidiscrimination rule similar to 8.4(g).
West Virginia (WV): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
Wisconsin (WI): Broader antidiscrimination rule, some language similar to 8.4(g). See state rule.
Wyoming (WY): Similar to Model Rule 8.4(d)/comments*, misconduct rules prior to adoption of 8.4(g). See state rule.
If you have additional or updated information about the status of antidiscrimination rules or other efforts in your states, please let us know.
*Prior to the adoption of Model Rule 8.4(g), narrow antidiscrimination language in the model rules existed under 8.4(d), providing that it was misconduct for a lawyer to “(d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice, and Comment 3 to the previous version of the Model Rules provided that “A lawyer who, in the course of representing a client, knowingly manifests by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, violates paragraph (d) when such actions are prejudicial to the administration of justice. Legitimate advocacy respecting the foregoing factors does not violate paragraph (d). A trial judge’s finding that peremptory challenges were exercised on a discriminatory basis does not alone establish a violation of this rule.” Some states followed and continue to follow the previous version of the model rules, or language close to it, i.e., some states may have the above 8.4(d) language only, while others may also include language similar to the above, previous version of Comment 3. Please see the below Draft Letter/Proposal to State Supreme Court/State Bar/Ethics Committee for a sample discussion of the need for broader antidiscrimination language than is available under 8.4(d) and the previous version of Comment 3 alone.