However, an attempt is being made to thwart the effectiveness of this potential by members of the criminal bar because it has a direct impact on the ability of attorneys to be paid from the proceeds of crime. As of May 1986, cases dealing with the forfeiture of assets transferred to attorneys as fees for services have centered on legal confidentiality and the right to counsel. While judicial decisions have been split on the issue, most courts have held that these forfeitures are impermissible. It is argued that legal privilege should not become an immunity for corrupt acts and that forfeiture does not affect the right to counsel but only the amount spent by the defendant on legal fees. It is suggested that attorneys be accorded the same responsibilities under forfeiture as all other providers of goods and services. It is further argued that while the right to counsel is absolute, the right to counsel of choice is not. It is urged that lawmakers and the judiciary should oppose the creation of this exemption to forfeiture provision. 35 footnotes.