This is where groups like the ACLU come in.
Doing this on behalf of the client would be the absolute wrong thing to do. Any lawyer that would do that should be disbarred.
The ACLU would only have the opportunity if this kind of subpoena was used on the ACLU itself.
This is not true. Check out the American Bar Association Rules of Professional Conduct 1.2 (https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibili...).
Broadly speaking, lawyers are bound to the client's wishes, and are expected to represent their client the best they can under those circumstances.
If a lawyer's client wants to sue the NYPD, even if the chances of winning are slim, they can represent that client (barring some niche scenarios).
This is how the ACLU typically works. They find someone with standing who cares enough to bother with following the lawsuit through and they represent that person.
The client isn't the only person with things to lose here, it's their sources who are at risk if he loses the case.
The client wouldn't pursue it for journalistic ethics reasons.
This is a novel take. Were this me, I'd require my lawyer pursue the NYPD for the cost of the original legal fees. They would not refuse.
Even if the client asks for that?
He'd be giving up his sources and even opening himself up to the risk of them investigating him and charging him with other crimes.
Any intelligent attorney would advise their client against it.
Once you go to court anything can happen and either way it's prohibitively expensive.
People in my own family have done nothing wrong and lost everything they owned fighting in civil court over smaller stakes than this. Going to civil court is the absolute last resort. Nobody wins but the attorneys.
Going to court is only worth it in criminal cases and insurance/liability cases.
/s used to work at one of the largest lawfirms in the US.
This is how they actually work.
