New
York may not regulate Giuliani (or other lawyers) because it has never
determined that lawyers are a profession of such a nature that without its
legislative regulation a lot of people will suffer a lot of serious harm
Tatiana Neroni, J.D.
September 24, 2021
The U.S. Supreme Court has clearly stated over 100
years ago that the government may only regulated those businesses and professions
which are of such nature that without legislative regulation,
will cause a lot of people a lot of bad harm[1].
In other words, only inherently dangerous and
dishonest professions and businesses may be constitutionally regulated by the government.
On that premise, why then do we have to populate our
judiciary and our prosecutors only and exclusively with members of that
inherently dangerous and dishonest profession?
Especially that the profession has proven its inherent
danger and dishonesty by giving to themselves absolute immunity to commit crimes
in office – as judges[2] and as prosecutors[3].
So, they have allowed themselves to fabricate cases,
including Giuliani’s, with impunity – and now they are teaching Giuliani how to
tell the truth to the public?
But if Giuliani sues them in federal court, will
invoke judicial and prosecutorial immunity for fabricating cases?
This little inconsistency aside, there was never any
determination by the New York legislature that the legal profession is of such
a nature (dangerous and dishonest) that without legislative control a lot of
people will suffer a lot of serious harm.
Therefore, according to the U.S. Supreme Court precedent[4], New York may not
constitutionally regulate lawyers, and the decision against Giuliani is null
and void.
No comments:
Post a Comment