[brief] IMPERMISSIBLY INFRINGES ON THE SUPREME COURT’S EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE THE PRACTICE OF LAW.  A.  Under the New Jersey Constitution, the Supreme Court is Vested with the Exclusive Authority to Regulate the Practice of Law.  Prior to the adoption of the current New Jersey Constitution, all three branches of government were involved in the admission of attorneys to practice, and both the Legislature and Judiciary exercised control over attorney conduct.  See State v. Rush, 46 N.J. 399, 411 (1966).  The New Jersey Constitution of 1947, however, granted the Supreme Court the exclusive authority to: []make rules governing the administration of all courts in the State and, subject to the law, the practice and procedure in all such courts.  The Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction over the admission to the practice of law and the discipline of persons admitted.  N.J. Const. art. VI, § 2, ¶ 3.  See also State v. Rue, 175 N.J. 1, 14 (2002) (discussing the Court's authority to proscribe disciplinary and procedural rules for attorneys and the practice of law).  Thus the Supreme Court, not the executive or Legislature, is vested with the exclusive authority over the practice of law.  See, e.g., State v. Bander, 106 N.J. Super. 196, 200 (Monmouth County Ct.), rev'd on other grounds, 56 N.J. 196 (1970) “It is now well settled in our State that the Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction over the practice of law. ”); *Winberry v. Salisbury*, 5 N.J. 240, 255 (1950) (expressly rejecting the possibility that the State Constitution granted the legislature authority over the courts).  The Court elucidated this principle in *In re LiVolsi*, 85 N.J. 576, 585 (1981), stating that:  For 33 years this Court has exercised plenary, exclusive, and almost unchallenged power over the practice of law in all of its aspects under [the New Jersey Constitution].  The Supreme Court exercises “its constitutional authority to govern the admission to practice and the discipline of persons admitted by the adoption of rules governing attorney conduct and by the issuance of opinions construing the rules. ”  [...], *New Jersey Attorney Ethics*, §1:2.  “Exercise of the Court’s Authority Through Rules and Opinions” (GANN, 2025).  The Rules of Professional Conduct (RPCs) are the Supreme Court’s codification of the rules governing attorney conduct in New Jersey.  The Supreme Court has also established several committees that consider issues implicated by the RPCs and to address those issues when needed.  As a result, the substantive body of law governing attorneys and the practice of law in New Jersey consists of: ]the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Rules Governing the Courts of the State of New Jersey, the opinions touching on attorney ethics issued by the Supreme Court itself, and the opinions issued periodically by the committees of the Supreme Court, specifically, the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, the Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law, and the Committee on Attorney Advertising.  _Id._  Every aspect of a lawyer’s practice is encompassed by these rules.  Everything from the process by which attorneys are admitted to practice, to the manner in which an attorney may leave the practice of law, are regulated.  Advertising, accounting of client funds, communication with clients, dealings with third parties, competence of the attorney, conflicts of interest, and the unauthorized practice of law are among the myriad subjects that these comprehensive rules contemplate.  The penalty for attorney misconduct in violation of these rules ranges from admonition to censure to disbarment, subject to the recommendations of the Disciplinary Review Board and Office of Attorney Ethics.