"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.

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Exchange of gifts between American Inns of Court, attorneys and judges behind closed doors really smacks of corruption and should be investigated

I have written in this blog about the so-called American Inns of Court and the benefits this attorney-funded secret-membership organization gives to participating judges.

I have also just made a post about the swift actions of an Inn of Court in Albany and a federal judge Lawrence Kahn to remove Judge Kahn's name as the President of the Inn as soon as a federal civil rights lawsuit seeking discovery of Judge Kahn's perks from that organization was filed, and about the multiple suspicious connections that one of the powerful law firms whose members confirmed participation in Judge Kahn's inn of court have with Judge Kahn's court.

Here is a diagram I put together showing the possibilities of corruption through the secret communications and secret monetary and non-monetary arrangements between judges and attorneys through social networking organizations such as the American Inns of Court.

I say "possibilities of corruption" because the actual documents on true membership and true perks, both monetary and non-monetary, that judges receive from attorneys in such organizations are secret, and I can draw reasonable inferences only from the information I have found about judicial participation in the Inns of Court on the websites of the few Inns that made that information available.

As I already wrote in this blog, that in an action that clearly seemed like protecting their recent employees, and, possibly, protecting their personal interests, Judge Kahn together with Judge Suddaby, a judge whose former law clerk joined the law firm that was sued in Neroni v. Peebles that Judge Suddaby dismissed sua sponte, did not allow me a possibility to explore the issue of possible judicial corruption of judges who decided and are deciding my fate, through discovery.

Yet, please, look at the diagram above and look at the scans that I made from the list of certified CLE (continued legal education) providers below (a lucrative appointment allowing certified providers to charge hundreds of dollars for live CLE sessions while New York requires "new attorneys" to attend live CLE sessions for the first 2 years after admission):


Yet, these same organizations are in receipt of lucrative endorsement from the judiciary allowing more money to come their way - to be used for more catering for judges behind closed doors?

In encourage you, my readers, members of the public, whose rights are daily affected by judicial decisions, to check out on the Internet the websites of each and every "Inn of Court" which was endorsed as a certified CLE provider (see photos above).  

You will see, as I did, that all of those organizations conceal their membership, their schedule of meetings, whether judicial members are accepted and pay for their participation and what kind of perks were offered to judges and members of their families for free - such as, possibly, free international travel for judges and their spouses, as I described earlier in my blog when I first described the American Inns of Court.

So, each time you are in court, whether state or federal, against a large and powerful law firm, if the judge ruled for that law firm, you never know whether the judge ruled this way based on the law and the judge's so-called "discretion", or whether that "discretion" was motivated by a secret lavish dinner with alcohol, by a free international trip with the judge's spouse at the expense of the organization sponsored by the law firm.

When justice is bought this way, you can never be assured of "judicial independence" or "judicial integrity" of ANY judge who rules in your case, because, once again - membership in such organizations, as well as perks of particular organizations for its members, and member fees or lack thereof for judicial members are a SECRET that I could not reveal even through a federal lawsuit.

I wish that the U.S. Attorney's office already investigating corruption in New York State government, will finally turn their eye on these cosy arrangements, because such a blatant, how to put it politely,  this exchange of gifts between the judiciary and organization of politically powerful and wealthy attorneys who are providing monetary and non-monetary benefits to judges behind closed doors should simply stop. 

Even though children of judges may work in that office, like the son of Chief Judge Gary L. Sharpe of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York does...

No comments:

Post a Comment