ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct: The Complete Guide

What the Model Rules Are (and Aren’t)

The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct are a set of model ethics rules for lawyers, adopted by the ABA House of Delegates in 1983 and amended many times since (they replaced the 1969 Model Code of Professional Responsibility). They are not binding law on their own: each state's highest court decides whether and how to adopt them, so a state may enact the Model Rules largely as written, modify them, or keep a differently organized code. California, for example, adopted a reorganized set of rules in 2018 that track the Model Rules' numbering. The ABA publishes the current rules and comments; we link to the official text rather than reproduce it.

The framing matters. The Model Rules are exactly that — a model. On their own they bind no one. What makes them consequential is that most states adopt a version of them as the binding ethics code lawyers in that state must follow, enforced by that state’s disciplinary authority. So when you read about “Rule 1.6” or “Rule 1.7,” the number is the ABA’s, but the rule that actually governs a given lawyer is that lawyer’s state version, which may track the model closely or diverge. Because the rule text is the ABA’s copyrighted work product, we describe what each rule addresses and link to the official text rather than reproducing it.

Rule 1.6: Confidentiality of Information

Rule 1.6 is the duty of confidentiality — the foundation of the lawyer-client relationship. In broad terms, it directs a lawyer not to reveal information relating to the representation of a client without the client’s informed consent, subject to a set of specific exceptions the rule spells out (for example, to prevent certain serious harms, or to comply with a court order or other law). It is broader than the evidentiary attorney-client privilege: privilege governs what can be compelled as evidence, while Rule 1.6’s confidentiality duty governs the lawyer’s own disclosures generally. The precise exceptions vary by state, so the operative details come from the adopting jurisdiction.

Rule 1.7: Conflicts of Interest

Rule 1.7 addresses concurrent conflicts of interest — situations where a lawyer’s representation of one current client would be directly adverse to another current client, or where there is a significant risk that the representation would be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client, a former client, a third person, or the lawyer’s own interests. The rule sets out when, despite such a conflict, a lawyer may still proceed — generally requiring the lawyer’s reasonable belief that they can competently and diligently represent each affected client, that the representation is not prohibited by law, and that each affected client gives informed consent, often confirmed in writing. Again, the exact contours are set by each state’s version.

Key Model Rules, Explained

The Model Rules are organized into numbered articles that track the arc of a lawyer’s work. In outline, they cover: the client-lawyer relationship (competence, scope, fees, confidentiality, and conflicts — the 1.x rules); the lawyer’s role as counselor and as advocate before a tribunal (candor to the court, fairness to opposing parties); dealings with people other than clients; the structure and supervision of law firms and associations; public service, including pro bono; the rules on advertising and solicitation of clients; and rules on maintaining the integrity of the profession. Rather than reproduce each rule, we describe the territory and send you to the official text below, where every rule appears with its explanatory comments.

Formal Opinion 512: Generative AI

The ABA also issues formal ethics opinions that interpret how the Model Rules apply to specific situations. Formal Opinion 512, issued in 2024, addresses lawyers’ use of generative artificial intelligence. In general terms, it explains that a lawyer’s existing duties still govern when using these tools: competence (understanding the technology’s benefits and risks well enough to use it responsibly), confidentiality (protecting client information when inputting it into a tool), candor and verification (checking AI output, which can fabricate citations, before relying on it), reasonable fees, and appropriate communication with and supervision of the client and staff. Like all such opinions it is guidance interpreting the model rules, not binding law in itself; states may take their own positions.

How States Adopt (and Modify) the Model Rules

Every state’s highest court sets the ethics rules for lawyers in that state, and the great majority have adopted rules based on the ABA model — which is why lawyers across the country can speak a common language of “Rule 1.6” and “Rule 1.7.” But adoption is not uniform. States amend, add, and reorganize. California is the notable outlier: it long used a differently organized code and, effective in 2018, adopted a set of rules that tracks the Model Rules’ numbering while keeping distinctive California provisions. The takeaway for anyone researching a specific duty is to read the rule as adopted in the relevant state, not just the ABA model.

Where to Read the Full Text Free

The ABA publishes the current Model Rules and their official comments free on its website, and that is the authoritative place to read the actual language. For the rules that bind a particular lawyer, consult that state’s adopted version, usually published free by the state bar or the state’s highest court. To understand how the ABA fits into the wider profession, see the American Bar Association.