We're Being Urged To Not Take Our Eyes Off The Ball...
...Though Many (Most?) in Courts and on Benches Never Have
My Comment On:
NYT Editorial Board Piece Now Is Not the Time to Tune Out
Judge Linda Parker's lawyer-sanctioning opinion (first paragraph of which above) in Michigan (2021) was the first encouraging sign I encountered in this worrisome season of amassing immorality. But like so much else, it was grossly under-covered and not allowed to make even a mere scratch in the surface of public consciousness.
It was the first such major push-back from constitutional integrity to the seizing and scrapping of the rule of law by hack lawyers (Trump's). It masterfully articulated what should be a stark and well-established difference between public discourse which allows for so much untruth and the judicial realm in which one MUST have some sort of epistemological standing in order to legitimately spend the public's tax dollars and the time and energy of our honorable courts' servants. They did not have any, yet they brought these stop-the-steal cases nevertheless.
The Trump team’s extra-legal efforts—as we all know now if not at the time— were nefarious, wasteful and well-worthy of being assailed from the bench. Parker’s opinion was the first measure taken to call them out inarguably and it led to an eventual disbarment of several of those agents, including the ersatz and sunsetting "America's Mayor".
I wish, work and pray that those efforts continue more pervasively in the face of the current ministers of intimidation and their cudgel-wielding.
I'd bet that the upper eschelon MAGA-surrectionists have a deep-seated (and yes, presently-puckered) respect and fear for and of those high-principled judicial entities (all hail the Great Litigating and Legislating Ladies of Michigan!) within those rust-belt States. They're obviously not swayed nor sleeping and are willing to stand fearlessly atop the hill of justice, vulnerable to injury but are indeed so obdurate and activated so as not to die there.
We should all follow and stand tall with them.
"Individuals may have a right (within certain bounds) to disseminate allegations of fraud unsupported by law or fact in the public sphere. But attorneys cannot exploit their privilege and access to the judicial process to do the same.And when an attorney has done so, sanctions are in order. Here’s why:
America’s civil litigation system affords individuals the privilege to file a lawsuit to allege a violation of law. Individuals, however, must litigate within the established parameters for filing a claim. Such parameters are set forth in statutes, rules of civil procedure, local court rules, and professional rules of responsibility and ethics. Every attorney who files a claim on behalf of a client is charged with the obligation to know these statutes and rules, as well as the law allegedly violated." This isn't "legislating from the bench".
One of the judge's crucial jobs is, however, to WEIGH EVIDENCE. At all stages. If there's none, there should be no case accepted and, if the lawyers were aware they had no evidence, the claim should not initially have been legally presented. Look to the Supreme Court to "legislate from the bench", as some say, for legislating from the bench. They do so by upholding or striking down laws which were written and passed by the legislative bodies and passed or vetoed by the executive. They've been doing that with the Roberts/Alito court through the appellate process (all the cases)---and doing it at best poorly and at worst nefariously under the guise of "constitutionalism". Rewiring the logic of precedent, convoluting rationale, and sometimes blatantly ignoring standing precedent to overturn long-standing laws is indeed political legislating from the bench. They need not answer to ethical standards, or even explain their rulings if they so choose. The lawyers bringing the cases below that level do, however, need to show sufficient evidence and need to explain themselves. Those shtheels didn't. They were called out for it.
Your “ view “ of the Michigan. Judges decision on the fraud that was perpetrated on the country in 2020 could not be any further from reality . She decided to legislate from the bench . A judges job is to administer the law as written not interpret it to their liking !