United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

____________ FILED November 13, 2023 No. 22-30564 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

Randy Boudreaux,

Plaintiff—Appellant,

versus

Louisiana State Bar Association, a Louisiana Nonprofit Corporation; Louisiana Supreme Court; Bernette J. Johnson, Chief Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court; Scott J. Crichton, Associate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the Second District; James T. Genovese, Associate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the Third District; Marcus R. Clark, Associate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the Fourth District; Jefferson D. Hughes, III, Associate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the Fifth District; John L. Weimer, Associate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the Sixth District; Unidentified Party, successor to the Honorable Greg Guidry as Associate Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court for the First District,

Defendants—Appellees. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:19-CV-11962 ______________________________ Case: 22-30564 Document: 00516965954 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/13/2023

Before King, Smith, and Elrod, Circuit Judges. Jerry E. Smith, Circuit Judge: The First Amendment protects an individual’s right both to speak and not to speak. Similarly, it protects one’s right to associate and not to asso- ciate. Janus v. Am. Fed’n of State, Cnty., and Mun. Emps., Council 31, 138 S. Ct. 2448, 2463 (2018). Yet every lawyer in this circuit is required to join his or her state bar association to practice law. And those bar associations speak publicly on a variety of issues—some of them very controversial. That raises obvious constitutional concerns. Although lawyers do not have a categorical First Amendment right to disassociate from their state bar, compulsory bar membership is unconstitu- tional if a bar’s speech is not germane to regulating lawyers or improving the quality of legal services in the state. Keller v. State Bar of Cal., 496 U.S. 1, 13– 14 (1990). Two years ago, we made that clear when we held that the State Bar of Texas violated its members’ rights to free speech and association by engaging in non-germane political advocacy. See McDonald v. Longley, 4 F.4th 229, 237, 245, 252 (5th Cir. 2021) (Smith, J.), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 1442 (2022). In response to McDonald, the Louisiana State Bar Association (the “LSBA”) changed its internal policies and stopped almost all of its legislative activity. But Randy Boudreaux—a lawyer in Louisiana—claims that the LSBA is still flouting that decision. He insists that the organization’s ongoing expression is not germane and that his forced membership in the LSBA vio- lates his speech and association rights. To its credit, the LSBA has stopped much of its objectionable activity. But despite the LSBA’s scruples, Boudreaux has still identified some exam- ples of non-germane speech. We therefore reiterate what we said in McDonald—if mandatory bar associations are going to compel individuals to Case: 22-30564 Document: 00516965954