#Legal Ethics

[alwaysbewoke]

the fix is in!!

[i-am-trans-gwender]

A critique of the Harkness Test

Judge: Daphne Blake has been charged with HAVING SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH SCOOBY DOO?

Lawyer: My client has done nothing wrong. Unlike most dogs, Scooby Doo passes the Harkness Test.

Judge: The what test?

Lawyer: The Harkness Test. It's a set of guidelines named after Captain Jack Harkness. The criteria is 1) Does it have human intelligence or higher?, 2) Can it talk or otherwise communicate with with language?, 3) Is it of sexual maturity for it's species?. If the answer to all 3 is yes then it's ok to fuck. Therefore it's ok for humans to fuck Scooby Doo.

Prosecutor: Objection! Shouldn't one of the questions be: "Is it humanoid?"

Lawyer: You're missing the point of the test! It's specifically for when it is and when it isn't ok to fuck feral animals. Also Barry Benson passes the test even with your rule.

Prosecutor: That's bestiality your honor! It's illegal to have intercourse with a "thousand year old dragon girl who looks like a three year old human." So how is it any different to have intercourse with a dog who is not physically human at all?

[ivygorgon]

AN OPEN LETTER to THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Co-sponsor The Judicial Ethics Enforcement Act of 2024!

59 so far! Help us get to 100 signers!

A group of House Democrats, led by Reps. Melanie Stansbury, Ilhan Omar and Jamie Raskin, have introduced legislation that would strengthen oversight of the Supreme Court. I’m writing in support of it.

The Judicial Ethics Enforcement Act of 2024 would authorize the creation of an office of the inspector general to investigate allegations of misconduct in the judicial branch. The inspector general would also investigate alleged violations of the Supreme Court code of ethics, issued in November; conduct and supervise audits; and recommend changes in laws or regulations governing the judiciary. The inspector general would be required to inform the attorney general when they believe there has been a violation of federal criminal law.

Congress must pass this bill. Confidence in the Supreme Court is at an all-time low, and there’s good reason for that. Several of its justices are deeply compromised and everyone can see it.

Please co-sponsor The Judicial Ethics Enforcement Act of 2024 right away, so the provisions in it can begin to restore Americans’ faith in our highest court. Thanks.

▶ Created on April 19 by Jess Craven

📱 Text SIGN PWCSGV to 50409

🤯 Liked it? Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409

[tmarshconnors]

“The price of freedom of religion or of speech or of the press is that we must put up with, and even pay for, a good deal of rubbish.”

Robert Houghwout Jackson was an American lawyer, jurist, and politician who served as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1941 until his death in 1954.

Born: 13 February 1892, Spring Creek Township, Pennsylvania, United States

Died: 9 October 1954 (age 62 years), Washington, D.C., United States

Supreme Court Justice: Robert H. Jackson served as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1941 to 1954. He was appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Nuremberg Trials: Jackson is perhaps best known for his role as the chief United States prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials after World War II. These trials were historic as they prosecuted major Nazi war criminals for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide.

Legal Career: Before his appointment to the Supreme Court, Jackson held several significant positions, including Solicitor General (1938-1940) and Attorney General (1940-1941). His tenure in these roles was marked by his strong defense of New Deal legislation.

Influential Opinions: As a Supreme Court Justice, Jackson authored several important opinions. Notably, in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), he wrote the majority opinion that declared it unconstitutional to force public school students to salute the flag, emphasizing the protection of individual rights against government mandates.

Literary Style: Jackson was renowned for his eloquent and clear writing style. His opinions are often cited for their literary quality and persuasive power. His legal writings continue to be studied and admired for their clarity and rhetorical force.

[gwydionmisha]

Trump's Worst Lawyer, Alina Habba, May Be Disbarred For This

CW: Sexual Harassment

[schraubd]

.... And Getting Worse Roundup

This will not be my cheeriest roundup. But there are a bunch of links burning a hole in my pocket, so here you go. * * * * Apropos yesterday's post on Fugitive Uterus Laws, a Washington Post article on similar efforts underway to set up checkpoint towns in Texas designed to capture any pregnant women who has designs on leaving the state for freedom. North Carolina Republicans considering impeaching a state supreme court justice because she talked about racism. While I can't fault Slate for juxtaposing this against the undisclosed largesse heaped upon Justice Thomas, my mind more rapidly went to efforts in Wisconsin to impeach a state supreme court justice because she might vote for democracy. A politically engaged fifteen year old kid asked a (not even that tough!) question that made Ron DeSantis uncomfortable on the campaign trail. So he sent his goons to rough him up. You see, the real problem with the "War on Drugs" is that it's too metaphorical. The latest Fifth Circuit crack-pottery: it's probably illegal for the FDA to tell humans they're not horses (yes, this is the latest conservative institution to burn its remaining dignity in defense of ivermectin conspiracies). Georgia school district: saying the word "gay" around fifth graders is like graphically describing the horrors of the Holocaust to kindergarteners.  via The Debate Link https://ift.tt/75TN1sn

[sixbucks]

Arkansas Supreme Court: Ethical attorney conduct is just not in the budget.

[andrewjbernhard]

Challenging Attorney’s Fees in Florida Federal Courts

Are you facing challenges with prevailing party attorney’s fees in Florida federal court? Our latest post breaks down everything you need to know! From improper block billing and duplicative charges to relief from excessive fee awards. #bernhardlawfirm

Introduction In Florida’s federal courts, the issue of attorneys’ fees can become a contentious point of litigation, particularly when it comes to claims for prevailing party attorneys’ fees. Understanding how to challenge these claims is crucial for attorneys and parties involved in litigation. This article will explore the legal framework surrounding attorneys’ fees in federal court, the…

[ancillarylegalcorporation]

How Lawyers Can Avoid Ethical Pitfalls and Disciplinary Action

Navigating the ethical landscape of law practice is crucial for attorneys committed to upholding their duties and maintaining public trust. This article offers essential tips to help lawyers avoid ethical pitfalls and disciplinary actions, as outlined by the American Bar Association. From establishing effective office management systems and diligent client intake processes to ensuring transparent communication and proper handling of client funds, these strategies are vital for fostering a responsible practice. By prioritizing ethical obligations and maintaining diligence throughout client representation, attorneys can safeguard their careers and better serve their clients. Discover how to enhance your practice and uphold the integrity of the legal profession.

[pebblegalaxy]

Judicial Accountability Under the Consumer Protection Act: A Comparative Analysis of Doctors vs. Judges

Doctors vs. Judges: The Call for Judicial Accountability Under the Consumer Protection Act The profession of medicine has always been scrutinized under the magnifying glass of the law. Doctors, who are tasked with saving lives, are held to exacting standards, often judged for every decision, every diagnosis, and every action they take. But what happens when the tables are turned, and the…

[ph-law]

Revised Lawyer's Oath

A.M. No. 22-09-01-SC

I, (name), do solemnly swear (affirm) that I accept the honor, privilege, duty, and responsibility of practising law in the Philippines as an Officer of the Court in the interest of our people.

I declare fealty to the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines.

In doing so, I shall work towards promoting the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace.

I shall conscientiously and courageously work for justice, as well as safeguard the rights and meaningful freedoms of all persons, identities, and communities. I shall ensure greater and equitable access to justice. I shall do no falsehood nor shall I pervert the law to unjustly favor nor prejudice anyone. I shall faithfully discharge these duties and responsibilities to the best of my ability, with integrity, and utmost civility. I impose all these upon myself without mental reservation nor purpose of evasion.

[For oaths] So help me, God. (Omit for affirmations)

[attorney-anon]

I think a judge in a case I'm doing on the side for a family member may be committing judicial misconduct. Will I report it? Probably not, because the last thing I need is to start a war with a random judge, and I can't prove that it's misconduct - and even if I keep my identity confidential, this type of case is so rare that he will absolutely know it came from me.

But it's going to bother me.

[i-am-trans-gwender]

Lawyer: Your honor my client would like to plead "just joking" on the the bomb threats. Sure there was nothing in the threats to imply it was a joke and he really did build the bombs. BUT he wrote the threats and built the bombs because it was funny to him.

[koherston]

Disqualification of Attorney Reversed in Longstanding Child-Custody Dispute in Kingston, Tennessee: Nelson v. Justice

When can a lawyer be disqualified from representing a party in Tennessee?

Facts: Mother and Father are the parents of Child. In 2020, Mother moved to disqualify Father’s attorney, Ms. Guerrero, who is also Father’s wife and the mother of one of Father’s children. Mother argued that in her efforts to collect a monetary judgment against Father, Father’s wife may, as his spouse, know about Father’s assets and what Mother perceives to be Father’s efforts to hinder the…

[schraubd]

Corruption in the Family

By now, you've no doubt heard about the ongoing corruption controversy regarding Justice Thomas failing to disclose numerous financial gifts from a billionaire conservative friend. To a large extent, the usual suspects are lining up to criticize Justice Thomas and the usual suspects are organizing to defend him. But I want to focus on one thing in particular, embodied by this tweet from former Thomas clerk and Notre Dame Law Professor Nicole Garnett.

I've known Justice Thomas for over 25 years. He is the rare person whose goodness matches his greatness. It breaks my heart that so many are willing to go so far to attack a good, and great, man for political gain.

— Nicole Garnett (@nsgarnett) April 13, 2023

I am sympathetic to Professor Garnett here. I truly am. I've often pondered how I would respond if a loved one -- a mentor, relative, parent, friend -- was credibly accused of corruption or some other dire crime. How would I handle it if the judge I clerked for, the late Diane E. Murphy, whom I absolutely adored, turned out to have accepted millions of dollars in "gifts" without proper disclosures?

Even in writing that sentence, I wanted to hasten to add "now, I could never imagine Judge Murphy doing such a thing." Which is true, I can't imagine it. Judge Murphy was an extraordinarily kind, generous, and humble person; universally respected by peers of all ideological persuasions. She was the furthest thing from a financial grandstander.

But that's just the thing: in most cases like this, the crime is unimaginable to the perpetrator's loved ones right up until it happens. It is a myth, I think, that most wrongs of this nature are only committed by persons whom, once the truth comes out, their closest relations will be like "you know what? He did seem the type." It's always going to be a shock to someone.

Be honest with yourself: when it comes to the people closest to you, would you actually know if they were doing something wrong akin to what Justice Thomas is accused of? "Know" not in the loose sense of "I know their character," but in the strong sense of "I'm familiar with their accounting practices"/"I've seen their disclosures"/"I know what's going in and out of their bank accounts"? We don't know. It would come as a shock. If you woke up tomorrow and your parent was arrested for skimming money from their job, you'd be blindsided, and not really because you have a blind spot as far as your parents are concerned. The truth is, you would have probably had no way of knowing what they were up to until the investigation actually broke. It really would be unfathomable, even were it true.

So I do sympathize with Professor Garnett. I don't think she's myopic in identifying Justice Thomas as a personally warm and generous human being (something I've heard from multiple sources). I don't think it is a function of self-delusion that she didn't see this coming.

But the fact is that, for essentially every scandal like this, the perpetrator has loved ones for whom the scandal comes as a terrible, unfathomable surprise. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. That doesn't mean it wasn't wrong. For the individuals affected, the dissonance between the person they know and the crime alleged is beyond abnormal, it is a terrible, almost irresolvable discordance. From the vantage of broader society, that discordance is utterly and mundanely normal -- it characterizes every single case.

And so ultimately, this response to Professor Garnett gets it exactly right:

Justice Thomas might possibly be — and we’ve heard this from multiple sources — the kindest, most generous justice on the Supreme Court. That doesn’t change the fact he’s involved in a massive ethics scandal of his own making. https://t.co/eO6YYXWe7c

— Fix the Court (@FixTheCourt) April 14, 2023

via The Debate Link https://ift.tt/U9TLzdX