"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, January 20, 2016

To sweeten the deal with DiFiore, corrupt Cuomo nominates NYS Senate's own attorney Michael Garcia to the Court of Appeals - what a package!

Tomorrow New York Senate will vote whether or not to confirm Janet DiFiore (despite available documentary evidence of her corruption and misconduct warranting disbarment) as the Chief Judge of New York Court of Appeals.

Even after a unanimous vote of NYS Senate's Judiciary Committee after the theatrical "confirmation hearing" where only brown-nosers were invited and opposing witnesses with actual evidence against DiFiore were blocked, and their testimony misrepresented by Bonacic - NYS Senate somehow paused to vote today and did not yet confirm Janet DiFiore as Chief Judge of New York Court system.

So, NYS corrupt governor who needs DiFiore in that particular position of power, sweetened the deal - he nominated to the same court NYS Senate's OWN ATTORNEY!!!

Here is the proof:

Usually the State of New York and all of its branches, including the New York State Senate, is represented - by statute - by New York State Attorney General.

And if NYS Attorney General recuses himself, it is not just any random law firm that is picked to represent the New York Senate instead, those representing the Senate - and especially such known corruptioners as Skelos and Silver - are very close insiders, and especially when what the attorney is hired to do is fight subpoenas from the Moreland Commission.

By the way, Garcia was involved in investigation of the prostitution ring that outed as customer and led to resignation of Governor Spitzer and to put into power Governor Pataki, favored by the felon (and Garcia's client) Sheldon Silver.

Garcia ' s opposition to subpoenas for Silver and Dean did not save them from criminal prosecution.

Are Garcia and DiFiore nominated for high judicial seats to make them unreachable to Preet Bharara, now having made DiFiore in a position to regulate Bharara ' s law license?

So, Michael Garcia is joined at the hip with the Senate and it's felons.  And he is going to be on top of the judicial branch now?

What a sweet deal!

Cuomo is offering the Senate a deal they, probably, will not be able to refuse: to take Cuomo's corrupt nominee DiFiore, who will be fixing cases for Cuomo, and, so that the Senate would have their own benefit from the deal, to promote THEIR OWN COUNSEL to the same court - so that Michael Garcia would be fixing cases for the Senate, too.

Note names of two convicted felons Garcia represented and was in close contact with.  Silver is not yet in prison - but an attorney who represented him and, thus, was in close contact with him, is offered up as a bundle-deal for the replacement of Silver's buddy Lippman with Cuomo's corrupt puppet DiFiore.

I wonder what this nation's Founding Fathers would say about such "checks and balances" and such a "separation of powers":

the executive branch offers to the legislative branch a corrupt judicial nominee to fix its own cases, and sweetens the deal with another judicial nominee, attorney for the legislative branch, to fix their own cases.

Of course, it is better to have a judge on the top court as a case-fixer instead a "mere attorney".

Great job, Cuomo.  

I am holding my breath as to what NYS Senate will say.  Or - should I?

No comments:

Post a Comment