"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.

Sunday, December 30, 2018

My book regarding #SeparationOfChildren by New York government goes on a short New Year's sale today

My book goes up for a short New Year's sale today, as soon as Amazon approves the price change.

Here is a short explanation of what the book is.

Children are separated from parents by the government not only at the border.

State government has nearly 400,000 children at any given time separated from their biological parents and subjected to abuse, exposure to adult dangerous psychotropic medications, medical experimentation - and, ultimately, permanent separation from their parents, adoption out of foster care, for which CPS gets thousands of dollars per head of the child from federal incentive money, courtesy of federal legislation passed under President William Clinton.

I wrote about the legislation in 2014 here, when Barrack Obama was President.  Nothing changed since then - to the better.

Since the money incentive law is federal, all states have adopted similar CPS laws to satisfy federal conditions to get the incentive money.

Thus, the nightmare parents across the United States are experiencing is similar.

The quagmire of quasi-criminal unconstitutional laws cast against parents in order to grab their children in New York is described in my book "The Oxygen Mask Rule" in Amazon , with a detailed analysis of laws used to make the parent make *confessions", "allow" warrantless searches of the house, submit to unconstitutional body and mind searches and "allow" CPS to grab the children "to keep them safe" - which results most often in a separation forever, for which separation the feds pay several thousand dollars per head of stolen children to state CPS departments.
I will reduce the price of the Kindle and paper book today for a short-term New Year promotion, to nearly nothing and put it also in Kindle Unlimited.
This is the topic in which the press is not interested, since it is a big business in the US, "legitimately" stealing children, using them in illegal medical experimentation while they are in foster care, and then sell them into adoption , for federal money.
To prevent that kidnapping and sale of children, a parent must first know how to keep himself out of jail when CPS is at the door, while so many tricks are devised to put him there. Hence, the name of the book, "The Oxygen Mask Rule".
Defense of parents against CPS is not taught in law schools, so there is no hope that a licensed attorney, by virtue of being licensed, will "know what to do" against CPS.
Moreover, attorneys opposing CPS are targeted for disbarment, so a parent would be better off learning himself what needs to be done in his own defense, to use legitimate tools his attorney will be afraid to use, and to monitor actions of his attorney .
This is the first book of the series, and the only book on defense against CPS in New York available in Amazon.
The next book of the series, access to records in such cases, which c an mean a difference between keeping the child or losing him forever, is coming out, at least I plan it, in 2019.

No comments:

Post a Comment