Independence of Representation in Court and Judicial Accountability in the United States: The disaster of Amy Merklen

THE EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY IN THE UNITED STATES:

"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.

Monday, February 23, 2026

The disaster of Amy Merklen

I wrote at the time Amy Merklen was ascended to power by Delaware County Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors Tina Mole - and I know Amy Merklen personally, from opposing her in litigation: she is bad news, and not in terms of fear of her competence.

She is incompetent, lazy, bad-tempered and vindictive - and all of that has been visited on Delaware County and its taxpayers, myself included, since 2017, with disastrous fiscal consequences and consequences to people's rights.

Now that the County is up to its eyeballs in litigation because of Amy Merklen and spent and continues to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on attorneys whose authority to represent the County I could not verify through FOIL requests with the County (County simply does not have any

documentation supporting that authority) - readers will be thrilled to read, from the horse's own mouth, the revelations of Amy Merklen in her declaration in support of her motion for a summary judgment against the local newspaper that is suing her for 1st Amendment retaliation.

Note that even the threat of punitive damages did not clear up the brain - either of Merklen or of her attorneys - and Merklen continues to barge claiming, as of right, her right to "advise" the County officers and employees how to block the flow of information to the public and the press.

And - note that she confirms withholding benefits from Walton Reporter because of the contents of the reporting, a CLASSIC 1st Amendment violation. She is an ATTORNEY, for God's sake. Doesn't she have to go through CLE every year - in addition to her duty to know the law and ADVISE the County on how to NOT violate that same 1st Amendment?

And - by the way - she LIES, openly LIES, LIES UNDER OATH, UNDER THE PENALTY OF PERJURY - when she said that she never held herself out as being able to give commands to officers and employees of the County.

In her own testimony in the case against CPS Commissioner Dana Scuderi-Hunter, filed with the court, she testified that she was placed by the County higher than any other officer or employee of the County - appointed OR ELECTED. And she enjoyed every minute of relishing when the 3rd Department upheld the firing of Scuderi-Hunter, even though it nullified Merklen's charges of "insubordination" - to Merklen. Merklen and County's litigation attorney kept making public statements and made a statement directly in a lawsuit where I was a party that they won against Scuderi-Hunter ON ALL CHARGES - directly misrepresenting to the court the contents of the 3rd Department's decision.

So enjoy reading what they lying Merklen says here under the penalty of perjury.

In full knowledge that - who is going to charge her with perjury? Local pocket DA?