EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY:

"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 cos
t.



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.



“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.

"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.

Friday, September 25, 2015

NYS Statewide Commission for attorney discipline posted a report

Yesterday, on September 24, 2015, the New York State Statewide Commission for attorney discipline posted its official Report and Recommendations.

I must add that while it did that, New York State Court Administration is stalling my FOIL request for copies of affidavits of members of the public who were not invited to testify and upon which the Commission relied in addition to the transcripts of public hearings.  They stall my FOIL request even after telling the public that all submissions to the Commission were subject to the Freedom of Information Law.  



I guess, it is unrealistic and naive to expect fairness - or even following the law - by Commission on fairness handled by lawyers.

The report is a 97-page document and requires thorough review before I start posting my impressions from the report.


I will review it over the weekend and will post my analysis shortly.

Please, also note that until and unless I am provided all written submissions to the Commission that I asked in my FOIL request - which is currently being stalled by the NYS Court Administration - any analysis that I make of the Report will be preliminary, tentative and incomplete, because I am not able to see what was and what was not considered by the Commission from the important issues raised before it, as well as whose arguments the Commission considered and whose arguments the Commission ignored.

As I said, I will start posting my preliminary analysis, issue by issue, next week, and will continue to pressure NYS Court Administration to release to me copies of written submissions to the Commission.


Stay tuned.

No comments:

Post a Comment