Ethics

In the comments to my unscientific political poll of blog readers below, Steve Lubet made a very interesting point. He says that most people approach legal ethics in a non-partisan way.  Here was my response:

I'm not sure that I agree entirely with your point that legal ethics is a non-partisan affair. I think it's non-partisan regarding a large number of issues, but not all of them. For example, I suspect that there may be some partisan differences regarding how Rule 6.1 is perceived and whether the recent changes to Rule 3.8 were necessary and desirable. I also think there may be some partisan differences regarding perceptions of the advertising rules. Certainly, those provisions used to have a strong political spin to them. I don't know whether that's still true today, but I can think of a few instances where they still seem to have a partisan edge to them.

In most areas of law, it's my impression that there are at least a few controversial issues that tend to break along party lines. If that's right, the contention is that legal ethics is somehow different. Maybe it is.

What do you think?  Are there issues in legal ethics that tend to break along party lines?  If so, which ones?