What 1st Amendment?

Judicial retaliation against attorneys who criticize judges has been a recurrent topic on this blog.

I, as an attorney whose license was suspended for two years on November 13, 2015, for criticizing two judges in three motions, two of them to recuse, know the brunt of that retaliation first-hand.

Despite the fact that my criticism was (1) true and (2) fully protected by the 1st Amendment (as the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in June of 2015 in the case Reed v Town of Gilbert, invalidating content-based regulation of speech that did not pass strict scrutiny - and strict scrutiny test was never applied to my sanctions - courts stubbornly continue to enforce the unconstitutional suspension.

I am not alone in my plight.  Attorneys throughout the U.S. are being sanctioned, and raise the issue of their 1st Amendment protection to criticize misconduct of public officials, including judges.

Now, amazingly, a judge entered the fray of this fight.

In my previous blog (just updated) I described the plight of a judge who dared to call a spade and a spade and accused a prosecutor of being racist - based on the prosecutor's unquestionably racist actions.

Now the judge is in hot waters and is facing a disciplinary action for his protected speech on issues of grave public concern - CONFIRMED, systematic racism in criminal proceedings in his state.

Now a judge has to sue the Judicial Conduct Commission to protect his right of free speech that he did not abdicate when he put on his black robe - and that is exactly the same situation with attorneys, who did not abdicate their 1st Amendment rights to speak out on issues of public concerns, including judicial misconduct, in exchange for their state license and "permission" by the state to earn their livelihood, a federal constitutional right.

So, when an attorney criticizes a judge, she is disciplined.

When a (black) judge criticizes a (white) politically connected attorney, he is about to be disciplined, too.

This bacchanalia of discipline only hurts the public and prevents their access to court by eliminating attorneys and judges who can actually do their jobs honestly, as they were sworn to do.

And the public should be aware of it.