The Bar in Brief
This month, I am pleased to share my column space with Rajeev Majumdar, chair of the WSBA’s newly chartered Oath Review and Drafting Task Force. The task force’s work represents what could be a historic process more than a century in the making, considering the phrasing of our current Oath of Attorney stretches back to Washington’s territorial days. We are embarking on the oath-review process with curiosity and collaboration with members and the public as our guiding priorities; we want to hear from you: Does the current oath encapsulate the duties and responsibilities of a modern legal professional? Does it inspire you? Should it? Please be on the lookout in the weeks ahead for more information and for an email survey. Make the time to give your input. The oath is the promise that we all take to obtain our legal license, and I think it is well worth the effort to make sure those words are meaningful and relevant. I hope you do, too.
— Terra Nevitt, WSBA Executive Director
BY RAJEEV D. MAJUMDAR
On Law Day 2025, hundreds of legal professionals came together at courthouses throughout the state to retake their professional oath, demonstrating their commitment to the U.S. Constitution and justice for all Washingtonians. It was a powerful and inspirational movement, most agreed, with one exception: the oath itself. The phrasing of the current Oath of Attorney traces back to Washington’s territorial days.11 “Washington’s Territorial Legislature first enacted a statute defining the duties of an attorney in 1862; much of the language was drawn from a then-influential New York state statutory initiative known as the 1848 Field Code.” WSBA’s “Summary of the History of Washington State’s Oaths” available at www.wsba.org/oath. Some have observed that the oath is overlong and dated, while others attribute its length and complexity to the thought and deliberation that went into its creation.
Oaths have and should have meaning, but to be meaningful they should be understood and embraced. Our current oaths are not conducive to either easy understanding or embracement by many in that regard.22 Washington state did not have an official Oath of Attorney until 1909. The Supreme Court adopted an Oath for Limited Practice Officers in 1987 and an Oath for Limited License Legal Technicians in 2012. I have been chagrined repeatedly over the years to see experienced judges and attorneys stumble over the oath. As an example of the lack of easy understanding, in our current oath rests the promise: “I will abstain from all offensive personalities …” I recently learned that this phrase—owing to shifts in our comprehension of the meaning of words over time—is frequently misconstrued today but would have been perfectly understood by persons in the 18th and 19th centuries well versed in the parliamentary procedures of England. This line is not about staying away from emotionally toxic people; it is about oath takers themselves avoiding “personality” in their conduct—that is, to refrain from attacking an opponent’s personal character or speaking disrespectfully of others in debate. Is that what you took from that sentence when taking the oath? I certainly did not.
After that 2025 Law Day event, I did a survey of the oaths of a number of other states and found many of them to be short, understandable, meaningful, and to the point.33 Contra the Oath of Attorney of Kentucky which includes in part the following promise: “I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God.” I see no reason that we as an association cannot achieve the same in our state by making reasonable recommendations that we could persuade the Washington Supreme Court to adopt.
Apparently, many others had the same thought, as the WSBA received a great deal of feedback in the wake of Law Day from both the judiciary and practitioners regarding their dissatisfaction with the current oath. Much has changed since the 1800s, including the work and duties of a modern legal professional. The WSBA Board of Governors heard and agreed with these sentiments and charted the WSBA’s Oath Review and Drafting Task Force44 https://wsba.org/docs/default-source/oath-review-and-drafting-task-force/charter-for-oath-review-and-drafting-task-force.pdf?sfvrsn=2cf51af1_1. in response.
In the coming months, the task force will determine whether the oath ought to be updated and, if so, we will draft corresponding language and rule changes for consideration by the Washington Supreme Court. In having the honor of chairing the task force, I draw upon my experiences both as a practitioner and as a former WSBA president—and one thing I have learned from those experiences and from interacting with members near and far is that each of you has a vital role in making our profession and our society a better one. Your input will be invaluable in making our findings, and each and every licensed WSBA member will be receiving an email survey to solicit your input and feedback as to whether our professional oaths should be changed, what is important about it, and if necessary, what changes should be made. It is my goal for every member to have an opportunity to provide feedback to the committee, in addition to our charge to “obtain advisory perspectives from stakeholder groups with an interest in the content of the oath, including new and young lawyers; senior lawyers; the access-to-justice community; the judiciary; law schools and law students; Inns of Court; WSBA Sections; and county, affinity, and specialty bar associations.”
The oath is the gateway to our profession; it is the promise we solemnly undertake as a condition of receiving a legal license. We need to make sure that any potential changes to the oath reflect our collective beliefs about the core responsibilities and duties of a modern legal professional. And it is my belief that if there is a desire on the part of the membership, then we can surpass that baseline and create an oath that is truly inspirational for our profession and those we serve.
Please be on the lookout in the weeks ahead for more information and for the survey landing in your inboxes. You can track our progress throughout the process online at www.wsba.org/oath. If you love legal history, you will also want to look at the WSBA’s “Summary of the History of Washington State’s Oaths” available on that webpage as well.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Rajeev D. Majumdar is the managing partner of Whatcom Law Group. He served as the 2019-2020 WSBA president. He can be reached at:
NOTES
1. “Washington’s Territorial Legislature first enacted a statute defining the duties of an attorney in 1862; much of the language was drawn from a then-influential New York state statutory initiative known as the 1848 Field Code.” WSBA’s “Summary of the History of Washington State’s Oaths” available at www.wsba.org/oath.
2. Washington state did not have an official Oath of Attorney until 1909. The Supreme Court adopted an Oath for Limited Practice Officers in 1987 and an Oath for Limited License Legal Technicians in 2012.
3. Contra the Oath of Attorney of Kentucky which includes in part the following promise: “I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God.”