"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, October 16, 2021

New York State Attorney General Leticia James encourages mass commission of two crimes, state and federal, in order to please her professional association

Previously I have posted the entire memorandum of law of 2020 by New York State Attorney General Leticia James allowing real estate agents in New York to practice law in the state if they write only "simple contract" that do not violate agreements between local associations of lawyers and realtors (among some seemingly punitive wordplay that is devised to conceal the main permissive meaning of the memo).

Practice of law in the state of New York by people who do not have a license to practice law from a New York State Appellate Division ("unauthorized practice of law", or UPL)  is a crime of misdemeanor.

Additionally, market-sharing agreements (like associations of attorneys and realtors deciding if it is ok for members of one another's association to invade the other's trading turf) are crimes prohibited by federal antitrust laws (The Sherman/Clayton Act).

Additionally what constitutes a crime in New York must be defined by statute, the New York Penal Code, and not by agreements between trade associations - they have no legislative powers in New York.

So, neither NYS AG James, nor the court whose decision she quotes in her Memorandum of law could endorse commission of a state crime (UPL) on a condition that it is approved through commission of a federal crime.

Note that an attorney representing the State of New York endorses commission of these two crimes in order to please her own professional association.

Note that the duty of this elected public official is - supposedly - to enforce the laws of the State of New York and protect New-Yorkers from violators of the laws, not to encourage violation of the law.

No comments:

Post a Comment