I've recently blogged about the little scheme in Delaware County where prosecutors, police and probation officers are paid out of conviction fines through a "STOP DWI" program.
As much as it was pounded to the public as "savings" for taxpayers, it is a blatant constitutional violation that is geared to increase numbers of convictions without any regard to their legitimacy or constitutionality.
I've also blogged about incompetence and corruption in the Delaware County Sheriff's Department where police officer Derek Bowie who has been engaged in a vehicular assault upon a resident, a middle-aged disabled woman, and did that clearly in retaliation for her stance against misconduct in the government on the County level and in local courts.
I questioned more than once how can a police officer, or other public officials involved, be so DUMB as to not realize that their corruptness is quite transparent through their actions?
Well, I now found the root of the question.
Not only police officers in Delaware County are corrupt, incompetent and dumb, but the federal constitutional law in that jurisdiction allows the local government to sieve out smart applicants for police officer positions as a matter of intentional discrimination.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, 15 years ago (!), found that discrimination against applicants for the police force with a high IQ level.
Here is that brain-dead decision, in full glory.
Now, this is a galore for criminal defense attorneys... This "law" gives defense attorneys legitimate grounds to seek IQ scores of police officers in application for the position. And, if that is not a discrimination against an applicant, that is clearly a constitutional issue for members of the public who are stopped, investigated, prosecuted and put in jail by police officers picked out BECAUSE THEY ARE DUMB!
Wow.
Names of the "winner" judges of the 2nd Circuit who produced this masterpiece back in 2000 are:
- The Hon. Jon O. Newman - still on the court and was even chief judge of the 2nd Circuit court from 1993 to 1997. Judge Newman got his bachelor's degree in 1953, which puts his age at 69 at the time of his "IQ discrimination is constitutional" decision in 2000, and at 84 years of age now.
- The Hon. Rosemary S. Pooler, Circuit Judges - is still on the court, in an active status. Judge Pooler recevied her bachelor's degree in 1959. That puts her at about 63 years of age when she made the decision in the "IQ case", 15 years ago, and 78 years old now.
- The Hon. Lloyd D. George,* District Judge - is still on the Nevada District Court. Since judge George reportedly received his bachelor's degree in 1955, and bachelors degrees are received usually at the age of 22, his date of birth is approximately 1933, 67 years of age or more at the time he made the "IQ case" decision, and at 83 years of age now.
* Honorable Lloyd D. George of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.
The "trio" above affirmed, in a summary unpublished opinion, the decision of the Hon. Peter C. Dorsey, Senior United States District Judge - who died in 2012 at the age of 80.
Think about it!
All of these seniors making all of these CLEARLY DUMB decisions - while proclaiming the government's right to discriminate against the intelligent people in matters of employment!
How many lawyers argued, with a straight face, that intentionally putting in a ceiling blocking intelligent individuals from being employed on the police force is constitutional and is not violation of equal protection rights!
4 (four!) judges agreed!
Agreed that the government has a "state interest" to intentionally "dumb down" police force that is armed and is supposed to be able to make split-second judgment calls about life or death of citizens, your life or death.
After this decision, why NOT expect police brutality after that?
Why NOT expect police to use their weapons, their TASERS, their vehicles, as tools of abuse of those they simply do not like?
Don't you think that this decision, and decisions like that may be responsible for the wide spread and ever spreading police brutality - because employing dumb brutes on the police force is the POLICY of the government? And NOT employing intelligent people is also the POLICY of the government - to prevent job turnover!
I think the same test is actually applied to judgeships and attorney jobs for the government.
I remember how a retired judge from the Appellate Division 3rd Department (he is a local of Walton, NY, an ardent supporter of Carl Becker), Judge Carl Mugglin, told me, without having any record in front of him, and without having any basis to "rule" at an appellate settlement conference - "you will dig a hole for your clients, Mrs. Neroni, with your intellectual efforts".
I was stunned, my female client was stunned, but obviously, with all my legal education, I did not know about the case, it was not taught in our Civil Rights litigation class in law school, my law school professors did not impress on me that being smart may prevent you from getting a job in the government!
The last question - if judges would apply their own "discrimination on the IQ basis is constitutional" test to themselves, would they have passed the test?
I bet they would.