Loyalty is a central ideal in both legal ethics and fiduciary law, but recent theoretical approaches to legal ethics also emphasize the connection between the legal profession and the rule of law or democratic self-government. In order for lawyers to perform the role of securing relationships of mutual respect among citizens of a political community, the requirement of single-minded, partisan loyalty to clients may need to be relaxed. Fidelity to law may be in tension with fidelity to clients. This paper considers Daniel Markovits’s strong conception of loyalty and his argument that it follows from necessary conditions for democratic legitimacy. Markovits contends that partisan advocacy is necessary to transform the attitudes of citizens in a way that causes them to internalize the community’s scheme of legal rights and duties as the product of collective authorship by all affected citizens. In that sense, citizens can be said to internalize the requirements of the community’s law. The paper then defends a more modest internalist approach to legal legitimacy and authority, in which giving a legal justification for some action necessarily means committing oneself to a practical stance toward the law that assumes one’s membership in a political community and accepts the community’s laws as reasons for action.

中文翻译：

---

律师应该忠于客户、法律还是两者兼而有之？

忠诚是法律伦理和信托法的核心理念，但最近的法律伦理理论方法也强调法律职业与法治或民主自治之间的联系。为了让律师发挥确保政治共同体公民之间相互尊重关系的作用，可能需要放宽对客户一心一意、党派忠诚的要求。对法律的忠诚可能与对客户的忠诚存在紧张关系。本文考虑了丹尼尔·马尔科维茨 (Daniel Markovits) 对忠诚的强烈概念以及他认为忠诚源自民主合法性必要条件的论点。马尔科维茨争辩说，党派倡导对于改变公民的态度是必要的，使他们将社区的合法权利和义务计划内化为所有受影响公民集体创作的产物。从这个意义上说，公民可以说是内化了共同体法律的要求。然后，该论文捍卫了对法律合法性和权威的更温和的内在主义方法，其中为某些行动提供法律依据必然意味着自己对法律采取实际立场，假设自己是政治共同体的成员并接受共同体的法律作为理由为行动。