A few days ago I posted a story about a challenge to the constitutionality of the unified bar system in Texas. See here.
Today's news is that a similar lawsuit has been filed in Oklahoma.
The lawsuit, in a case called Schell v. Williams, filed on March 26, alleges that Oklahoma's requirement that attorneys join the state bar association to practice in the state is unconstitutional because by forcing attorneys to join the Oklahoma Bar Association, the state violates their First Amendment rights to free speech and association
As I discussed in my previous posts on this, this is not a new argument but it is not a frivolous argument. The question really goes to the core of whether such a requirement is necessary to regulate the legal profession or improve the quality of legal services. As of right now, there are similar challenges pending in, at least, Texas and North Dakota and the results in these cases will have national implications.
UPDATE 4/5/19: As I have said elsewhere, the question of whether mandatory membership in a bar association violates the First Amendment is not a new issue, so it is interesting that it is making such a strong comeback. In addition to the cases I reported recently, I was recently reminded by a reader of the blog that there are two separate lawsuits filed on similar grounds in Oregon as well as ongoing longstanding litigation against the Washington State Bar.
In Oregon, at least one of the lawsuits contends that the fact the state bar published a statement condemning White Nationalism and, what it called the "normalization of violence" was "blatantly political" and unconstitutional.
UPDATE 5/28/19: Another lawsuit claiming requiring lawyers to be members of the state bar association violates the First Amendment has been filed. The case is called Jarchow v State Bar of Wisconsin (Case No. 3:19-CV-00266) was filed, you guessed it, in Wisconsin on May 21.