It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
Wash. R. Prof'l. Cond. RPC 8.4
Comments
[1] [Washington revision] Lawyers are subject to discipline when they violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so or do so through the acts of another, as when they request or instruct an agent to do so on the lawyer's behalf. Lawyers are also subject to discipline if they assist or induce an LLLT to violate the LLLT RPC. Paragraph (a), however, does not prohibit a lawyer from advising a client concerning action the client is legally entitled to take.
[Comment 1 amended effective April 14, 2015.]
[2] [Reserved.]
[3] [Washington revision] Legitimate advocacy respecting the factors set forth in paragraph (h) does not violate paragraphs (d) or (h). A trial judge's finding that peremptory challenges were exercised on a discriminatory basis does not alone establish a violation of this Rule.
[4] A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law.
[5] Lawyers holding public office assume legal responsibilities going beyond those of other citizens. A lawyer's abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of lawyers. The same is true of abuse of positions of private trust such as trustee, executor, administrator, guardian, agent and officer, director or manager of a corporation or other organization.
Additional Washington Comments (6-8)
[6] Paragraphs (g) - (n) were taken from former Washington RPC 8.4 (as amended in 2002).
[7] Under paragraph (f)(2), lawyers are also subject to discipline if they assist or induce an LLLT to violate the LLLT RPC. See also Rule 4.3 Washington Comment [6].
[Comment 7 amended effective April 14, 2015.]
[8] A lawyer who counsels a client regarding Washington laws or assists a client in conduct that the lawyer reasonably believes is permitted by those laws (for example and without limitation, Washington laws related to reproductive health care services, gender-affirming care, or cannabis) does not thereby violate RPC 8.4. See also RPC 1.2 Washington Comment [18].
[Comment 8 adopted effective September 25, 2018.]
[Comments adopted effective September 1, 2006.]