First, the client was the catalyst. It chose to go out of state. Second, the kind of client who will go out of state is likely to be sophisticated. Third, the kind of matter for which a sophisticated client will choose to go out of state for a lawyer is likely to be highly specialized. In fact, clients in a host state do this sort of thing now, when looking for trial or appellate lawyers who can then be admitted in the host state pro hac vice.
Lawyers can do that in many ways.
A lawyer who lives on the border between two states may, through an Internet Web site and other marketing devices, broadly target potential host state clients for routine services. There seems to have been some sentiment in the testimony so far that the following conduct should be affirmatively forbidden. Establishing an office in a state if the lawyer is not admitted to the bar of that state or otherwise entitled to establish an office incident to a safe harbor, including those listed above. Whatever changes may occur as a result of this work, an ancillary question is the form in which those changes become part of governing law or rules. Within a state, of course, professional conduct rules can be amended, as can statutes and court rules.