Client confidentiality

Without thinking much about it, in an earlier post, I discussed a few decisions where my office, but not myself, represented the defendant. Then I went back and deleted those posts from the blog, because I decided there was no purpose to discusse those cases. I don't think it's unethical but I decided to err on the side of caution.

Here's my reasoning for why it's not unethical: (a) at the appellate level the trial has already occurred, all facts are on the record, etc; (b) often the appellate lawyer never meets his client, or if he does, no confidential information is exchanged, and this is well known; (c) as long as the blog post is consistent with the argument already made on public record, and does not unfairly slant the facts either way, it doesn't seem to disservice the client, particularly considering the very few people reading a blog; (d) SCOTUS, which covers the Supreme Court, is sponsored and prmariand primarily written by a firm called Goldstein & Howe, which advertises itself as practicing exclusively in the Supreme Court. On that blog, they discuss their own cases, always with a cautionary warning that they represent one of the litigants.

Having said all, there are so many things to talk about, why risk disrespecting a client's confidence?