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.

Monday, January 11, 2016

NDNY has much to fear to make secret its public suspension of my attorney license

Every federal court case in the United States is assigned a case number and committed to the public electronic information system, Pacer.gov.

 Here is my scan of federal trial cases where I am listed as a party.

There is no case filed in November of 2015 when I was suspended.

 Yet, such a file - allegedly - exists.

 I was suspended by the NDNY - allegedly - on November 18, 2015, while I was listed as attorney in good standing on November 20, 2015, documentary proof of which I submitted to that court in a filing.

 I filed in NDNY a motion to vacate the "reciprocal" order of suspension based on a facially invalid order of suspension in state court (facially invalid because of a pre-judgment - the state court faulted me not to "admit misconduct" or "express remorse" at the time when the state court did not decide the issue of my liability).

 Here is what I received today:


Note that the court assigned a case number to my attorney disciplinary "proceedings" in NDNY - 3:15-mc-00053-GTS.

 This case number is not listed on Pacer, even though the case file contains a very public order of reciprocal suspension.

 The way it is usually done is - the case file is public and is available on Pacer, the public entries in the case are also public and available on Pacer (like my order of suspension is supposed to be), and only the sealed entries are marked "sealed" and are not available for review of the public.

 But, there is no such thing in federal courts as "sealed" secret court cases that do not even show on the court's docket, especially in a case of already PUBLICLY imposed attorney discipline - unless we turned into a dictatorship overnight that I was not aware of, and our courts turned into Star Chambers also overnight, ruled only by their own whim and not by judge's constitutional oaths of office.

 Suddaby could choose to seal a case if he refused to review it on the merits.  Yet, Suddaby gave me a "special solicitude", reviewed and decided the case on the merits.

 And, where a motion challenging an order of public discipline is decided on the merits, it is a public record and may not be sealed.

 So, I wonder, since I just unsealed Judge Suddaby's illegal order denying on the merits my motion to vacate his sua sponte order of PUBLIC suspension of my law license - will he now prosecute me for such unsealing?

 Is it unlawful in this country to disobey an illegal court order?

 The State of New York already tried to criminally prosecute me for unsealing an illegal sealing order of my state disciplinary case while it was pending.   The State of New York obviously was very concerned about me blogging regarding my pending disciplinary case and misconduct of public authorities in that case.

 Obviously, the Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York is similarly concerned, so concerned that he has sealed and hid the entire disciplinary case, containing public records.

 A federal court and a federal judge is supposed to enforce federal constitutional rights of people who come before them.

 Instead, Glenn Suddaby is copycatting the State of New York in violating them.

 So, readers and researchers, here is a secret order in a secret attorney disciplinary case that imposed public discipline of reciprocal suspension.

 I or my family will report on this blog if I am going to be arrested and prosecuted for unsealing it.

 So far, I was threatened with an arrest:
  • By disciplinary prosecutor Mary Gasparini - for violating my own privacy and for talking about my disciplinary case and her own (and the court's) misconduct, while the case was pending;
  • By the Chenango County Supreme Court judge Kevin Dowd for not coming to trial because of a documented back injury (Dowd who has no medical license, criminally practiced medicine without a license and re-diagnosed me that I did not have back injury, was not in pain and could come, even if my doctor said I couldn't)

I am waiting whether Glenn Suddaby will now have me arrested for talking about his own misconduct, his alleged "special solicitude" and his alleged "special liberality" towards me.

Thank you, Judge Suddaby.  I do not need "a special solicitude" or "a special liberality" from you - I only need you to follow the law, which you continuously refuse to do.

You must know that whatever procedural mishaps you can conjure up against me based on your "Local Rules" produced by your court in an incestuous cooperation with a select few law firms that you favor,  my 1st Amendment right of access to court trumps all of your local rules, nor do you have no authority to take my federal law license based on a facially void state license suspension.  

And under your own constitutional oath of office you had to file my motion to vacate, and show people just why you believed that my request to void your "reciprocal suspension" is "unsupported by cause" - which you had to explain, but did not, same as the New York State disciplinary court that refused to explain why my constitutional motions were rejected.

I guess, if the state disciplinary court and Glenn Suddaby both fear me so much that they seal entire proceedings pertaining to discipline about me - I did something right in those proceedings.

Once again - if the federal court attempts to prosecute me for exposing their misconduct, I or my family members will post news about it.

Stay tuned.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)