A bipartisan legal advocacy group Wednesday filed an informal ethics complaint against Stefan Passantino, the former lawyer of former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson. The 65 Project argued that Passantino committed a series of ethics violations during his time as Hutchinson’s lawyer. As a result, the group asked that the Georgia State Bar conduct an investigation into Passantino’s possible violations of Georgia’s Rules of Professional Conduct.
Passantino represented Hutchinson before the US House Select Committee on the January 6th Attack. Hutchinson told the committee Passantino reached out to represent her for free, and she understood that someone else would pay her bill. Hutchinson later discovered that Trump was connected to the payment and services of Passantino. Hutchinson described how Passantino told her to provide the committee with as little information as possible and even recommended that Hutchinson not tell the truth.
The 65 Project alleges that Passantino’s actions amount to violations of Georgia’s Rules of Professional Conduct for lawyers. The group alleges three violations: obstruction of an investigation, breach of confidentiality guidelines and compromising professional responsibility through accepting funding.
Passantino’s alleged obstruction of an investigation violated rule 8.4, according to the 65 Project. Rule 8.4 states, “It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to…[e]ngage in conduct that seriously interferes with the administration of justice.” The 65 Project argues that Passantino violated this rule when he refused to prepare Hutchinson for her testimony before the committee. Passantino allegedly even recommended that Hutchinson not “read anything to try to jog” her memory ahead of sitting for an interview with the committee.
The 65 Project also alleged that Passantino violated rule 1.6 by breaching his confidentiality with Hutchinson. Rule 1.6 requires that lawyers not knowingly reveal client information to anyone without permission or to benefit a third party. Allegedly, Passantino spoke to journalists from the New York Times as well as his law partners about Hutchinson, despite her specifically objecting to him doing so.
Finally, the 65 Project argues Passantino violated rules 1.7 and 1.8 by having an interest in a third party over his own client and failing to disclose the source of his funding. Rule 1.7 bars lawyers from representing clients if their “professional judgment on behalf of the client will be or reasonably may be adversely affected by the lawyer’s responsibilities to or interests in a third party.” Related to that, rule 1.8 says that lawyers can only accept funding from someone other than their client so long as there is express consent from the client and no potential interference with the lawyer’s professional judgment or client relationship. A Trump-connected political action committee paid for Passantino’s services to Hutchinson. Hutchinson suspected this, but when she asked Passantino, she was continuously stonewalled. The 65 Project argues that Passantino “purposefully represented [Hutchinson] with the intention of protecting the reputation of third parties at the expense of [Hutchinson].”
This is the latest in a series of ethics complaints launched by the 65 Project against attorneys who sought to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. In their final report, the committee recommended that professional associations take actions to hold lawyers involved in the actions surrounding 2020 election interference accountable.
