Response to Duke's motion to shut down web site

On February 28th Duke and other defendants in the Civil lawsuit filed a motion to shut down the Duke Lawsuit web site whose motto is Accountability, Responsibility, Change.

The web site promised a response to the motion and they have filed it.

Response to Duke's Motion

ARGUMENT
"Duke’s motion is extraordinary. Duke not only acknowledges that the specific extrajudicial attorney statements it challenges either directly quote or closely paraphrase the allegations of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, it concedes that such statements are expressly authorized by Rule 3.6(b)(2)’s so-called “safe harbor” for attorney comments that relate“information in a public record.” Duke argues, however, that these statements nonetheless run afoul of the rule because they were “incendiary” (a characterization which Plaintiffs reject). Even if this Court were empowered and inclined to adopt Duke’s amendment to the rule, however, engrafting an “incendiary language” exception would plainly render the rule unconstitutionally vague under controlling Supreme Court precedent.

But Duke’s motion is even more remarkable for what it does not say. Nowhere
does Duke cite a single case in which a court, state or federal, has imposed sanctions or otherwise enforced the attorney speech restrictions of Rule 3.6 in civil litigation, and our research has turned up no such case. Duke’s motion thus seeks a ruling from this Court that appears to be without precedent in American jurisprudence."

See Duke Lawsuit web site for three exhibits.