THE EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY IN THE UNITED STATES:

"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

“This case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of not affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for admission. For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has many of the qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the rejected attorney candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic course in all of the activities of his life, but also that he combines these more common virtues with the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his principles at any cost.

It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the law. The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become a group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is to humiliate and degrade it.” In Re Anastaplo, 18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429 (1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong dissent, 366 U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan, dissenting.

" I do not believe that the practice of law is a "privilege" which empowers Government to deny lawyers their constitutional rights. The mere fact that a lawyer has important responsibilities in society does not require or even permit the State to deprive him of those protections of freedom set out in the Bill of Rights for the precise purpose of insuring the independence of the individual against the Government and those acting for the Government”. Lathrop v Donohue, 367 US 820 (1961), Justice Black, dissenting.

"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.

“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.

Friday, February 13, 2015

My blogs hit 100,000 views. Thank you for your readership.


My blogs covering issues of independence of court representation, access to court and judicial, prosecutorial misconduct and misconduct of "politically connected" attorneys hit over 100,000 viewers in less than a year.  Thank you, my readers!

That's a lot for such difficult and politically sensitive topics as attorney independence and judicial misconduct.

Readers' interest and readers' feedback show me that these topics are important to the public. Readers report to me from all over the country that judicial misconduct is rampant everywhere, but the media does not adequately cover these topics, out of fear or policy.

That was my personal experience, too.

Before starting this blog, I went to several media outlets who listened to me and then faded out and dud not run the stories.

Yet, we will achieve nothing if we are going to be hiding under the rock instead of addressing the blight on the name of this great country that pervasive and uncontrolled judicial misconduct has become.

This blog is my political statement as an attorney who is being persecuted for trying to do my best for my clients, including my attempts to ensure for my clients their constitutional right to an impartial judge.  

There is a growing recognition in this country that stifling criticism of the judiciary by attorneys, who know about judicial misconduct best, is a voter misinformation issue and a public safety issue.

Think "Kids for Cash" scandal in Pennsylvania where attorneys would not speak against the judge who was sentencing kids into a private juvenile facility for years, in return for kickbacks from owners of the facility who needed the "kiddy jail" full to keep the financing flowing.

When there is an uncontrollable king on the bench (and many, if not most, judges behave as if they are such kings in "their" courts), you may pretty much be assured that the democracy is dead and what you have is a dictatorship which will continue and affect your life for as long as you and other people will remain silent and accept it.

We need a court reform, we need to clean up the act of our "public servants" (including judges) who seem to run and control their master, the People, more than it is allowed to do by law.

Those who usurped absolute power should be legislatively controlled, and those controls should be effective.

I am grateful for your readership and feedback to my blog and will strive to continue to cover these issues in the future.

Thank you!
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)