So much to critique about this troubling & upsetting opinion published by @CanLawMag.

One thing to underline is fact that (contra this author) no theory or practical instantiation of zealous advocacy mandates/permits unconstrained courtroom speech.1/6 https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/news/opinion/british-columbias-practice-directions-on-preferred-gender-pronouns-in-court-are-problematic/337574#.YB5_PAvnUi8.twitter

“No one can dictate the words spoken or written by court participants including judges during judicial proceedings.”

There are SO many rules and requirements about who can say what when in court! 2/6

Among other things, it is uncontroversial that judges have obligations to direct and control courtroom speech and behaviour with a view to maintaining the dignity and decorum of the courtroom and its participants. 3/6

There is no right to say whatever you want in court, even if it reflects your client’s beliefs or you think it would help your client’s case 4/6

As a legal profession, we have so much work to do to ensure that trans people have effective access to justice. My colleague @samuelsingerlaw has an excellent chapter on trans competent lawyering that I highly recommend for learning more ( https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3615123). 5/6

Respecting pronouns is one step forward and an important part of ethical lawyering. Calling it “controversial” doesn’t change these facts. 6/6