The United States District Court for the Fourth Circuit described Ms. Hunter’s fearless representation of her clients in this case as follows:
“ In pursuing the First Lawsuit, Ms. Hunter… was plainly entitled (and probably obligated) to maintain that Austin was incorrectly decided… If unsuccessful, she might then have sought relief in the Supreme Court…”
Indeed, our good Chief Judge, in his Blue decision, observed that if it were forbidden to argue a position contrary to precedent, the parties and counsel who in the early 1950s brought the case of Brown v. Board of Education., 347 U.S. 483, 74 s. CT. 686, 98 l. Ed. 873 (1954) might have been thought by some district court to have engaged in sanctionable conduct for pursuing their claims in the face of the contrary precedent of Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, 18 S. ct. 1138, 41 L. Ed. 256 (1896). The civil rights movement might have died aborning: (Emphasis Added).
The Law Office of Pamela A. Hunter maintains its commitment to represent its clients within the bounds of the law, for a more moral and just society, even though representation of its clients may oppose existing precedent and the status quo.