What type of questions might use the phrase "Is the lawyer subject to discipline?"

The phrase "Is the lawyer subject to discipline?" typically indicates an inquiry into whether the lawyer's conduct falls below the standards expected by the legal profession and thus warrants disciplinary action. This situation usually arises in the context of ethical rules and professional responsibility.

In this context, "must" questions reflect an obligation or requirement that necessitates a clear legal or ethical standard being met, or not met, in the scenario presented. Using "must" emphasizes the necessity of compliance with ethical rules and the consequences for failing to do so. Therefore, when such a question arises, it is directly assessing whether the attorney’s actions trigger disciplinary action under established professional conduct rules.

The other options do not convey the same necessary requirement or obligation. "Should" questions often delve into recommendations or preferred practices rather than strict compliance. "Descriptive" questions focus on describing facts or scenarios without the implication of a legal judgment on the conduct. "Mandatory" questions might suggest obligations but lack the explicit connection to ethical duty enforcement that "must" conveys.

Thus, the phrase effectively aligns with a "must" inquiry regarding the standards of professional conduct and the potential disciplinary repercussions of failing to meet those standards.