"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.

Saturday, February 11, 2017

The #NewYorkStateAttorneyGeneralEricTSchneiderman publicly solicited and encouraged commission of felonies from New Yorkers when he encouraged creation of "sanctuary cities". Will he be prosecuted by the feds and disbarred?

On January 19, 2017, the New York State Attorney General Eric T.Schneiderman called upon New York municipalities to turn ALL New York municipalities into the so-called "sanctuary cities", towns refusing to report illegal immigrants/aliens to the federal government.

When President Trump threatened to withhold federal money and other sanctions to such "sanctuary cities", Eric Schneiderman issued a further "clarification", encouraging people into creation of "sanctuary cities" even more, and assuring people that the President and the federal government cannot do anything to them, if they do create sanctuary cities.

But, what Eric T. Schneiderman irresponsibly omitted to mention - and misrepresented by stating that the federal government can do nothing against people and municipalities giving sanctuaries to illegal aliens - is that those who

1) fail to report that somebody brings into the country or harbors/conceals illegal aliens; and
2) those who bring into the country and harbor/conceal illegal aliens,

are subject to criminal prosecution by the federal government.

Let's start with the shorter statute.

18 U.S.C. 4, "Misprision of felony", provides for 3 years and/or a fine for non-reporting commission of a federal felony to federal authorities.  Here is the statute:

18 U.S.C. 1324, "Bringing and harboring certain aliens", is a felony, so non-reporting that felony is a felony punishable by 18 U.S.C. 4 - with 3 years in federal prison and/or a fine.

Violation of 18 U.S.C. 1324 itself has a much more severe punishment, up to DEATH penalty depending on the circumstances, plus, where applicable, forfeiture of property used in commission of the crime of harboring illegal aliens.  That is what Eric T. Schneiderman also did not tell people he urged to created #"sanctuary cities".

So, it is a felony to bring into the United States not through an immigration checkpoints even immigrants with lawful visas or green cards.

So, if anybody brings an immigrant not through a designated port of entry, thus avoiding federal government's control of the entry, even if the immigrant has a valid visa or green card, that is a felony punishable by 10 years in federal prison.

Anybody who, knowing that a person came into the country illegally, provides means of transportation to escape discovery and who moves such illegal aliens around the country (as I see a lot of people call upon other people to do on Facebook in connection with the immigration raids that have been reported lately), that is also a felony punishable by 5 years in federal prison, a fine and, likely, a forfeiture of the vehicle, aircraft or other property used to commit the crime.

If, during such escape, anybody is seriously hurt, then the punishment will be incarceration for 20 years.

If, during commission of a crime of harboring an alien who got into the country illegally, anybody dies, the punishment for the crime is death penalty or life in prison.

These little details are omitted when the instigators of protests against enforcement of not only immigration law, but of federal criminal law, are drawing into the "protests" and, possibly, into activities described in this statute as felonies, clueless people who, with the best of intentions, are securing prison time for themselves, or worse.

When a person knows that an alien does not have an "authorization" to come into the country - that the immigrant does not have a valid visa or a valid green card - and still brings the person into the country:

1) it is punishable by up to 1 year in prison, if the crime is committed without aggravating circumstances listed in subparagraphs (ii) and (iii);

2) the prison term may be from 3 to 10 years in federal prison if the illegal alien is brought in "for commercial advantage or private financial gain", and if this violation of the law is first or second violation (the law is actually lenient);

3) the prison term will be up to 10 years if the alien, upon arrival into the U.S., is not brought to federal authorities immediately;

4) and, for any other violation - imprisonment will be from 5 to 15 years in federal prison. 

Moreover, if anybody knowingly hires 10 illegal aliens within a period of 1 year, that is a crime punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment for 5 years, or both;

If hiring 10 illegal aliens within 1 year is part of "an ongoing commercial organization or enterprise", if aliens "were transported in groups of 10 or more", if aliens were transported in a manner endangering their lives (human trafficking), or if aliens presented danger to people within the United States - the prison terms can be increased to 10 years.

Next are sections about possible forfeiture of property, including cars, boats or planes used to harbor or transport illegal aliens, and "prima facie evidence" of illegality - allowing records of immigration authorities to be used as a presumptive evidence that an individual is, indeed, an illegal alien.

So, New Yorkers who fell for the call of the kind guy Eric T. Schneiderman, the New York State Attorney General who asked New Yorkers to open their hearts to illegal aliens and not to give them up to the big bad wolf the federal government - only because that big bad wolf is now headed by Donald Trump and not by Hillary Clinton for whom Eric T.Schneiderman ran fundraisers, donated money to her election campaign, and, likely was promised a cozy nomination or appointment in exchange for his efforts - can be in for a rough surprise, facing a felony record, forfeiture of their property, fines and long prison terms, if not worse.

And so do people in other parts of the U.S. who fell for similar appeals to create "sanctuary cities" by irresponsible instigators.

And, by the way, let's remember that non-reporting any of the crimes described in the "long statute", 18 USC 1324, is punishable with a felony record, a fine, and/or incarceration for up to 3 years under the short federal statute, 18 USC 4.

I did not see anybody in the streets protesting existence of those statutes.

I guess, nobody told the protestors that these statutes are on the books and are waiting to be used on the clueless do-gooders lured by immoral and irresponsible instigators whose connections, most likely, will save their asses, but will expose those they lured.

And the last question - will Eric Schneiderman (who is also an attorney representing attorney disciplinary committees who prosecute cases of attorney discipline, and judges who decide attorney disciplinary cases in New York) be federally prosecuted for solicitation of federal felonies, and then disbarred?

No comments:

Post a Comment