Former Pennsylvania Congressman Suspended From Practicing Law Due To Criticism Of Judges

220px-Donald_A._BaileyFormer Democratic congressman and Auditor General Don Bailey, 68, had his law license suspended for five years by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for allegations and criticism directed at judges in the state. Bailey denounced the ruling and said that he would challenge it in federal court while denouncing the state justices as corrupt and malicious. While some would agree with the case, there is a worrisome line of cases targeting lawyers who criticize judges.

Bailey has accused federal judges of malfeasance, charges found to be baseless. He said that he was targeted by several U.S. Middle District Court judges who set out to ruin his practice.

Bailey was a congressman from 1979 until 1983, when his Westmoreland County seat was eliminated through redistricting. He had a remarkable military career. He served with the 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions in Vietnam and was awarded the Silver Star, three Bronze Stars, two with the Valor device, one for meritorious achievement, Army Commendation Medal, with “V” for Valor, Air Medal, and a second Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service.

I have previously expressed concern over cases of discipline for both lawyers and laypersons criticizing judges. One troubling case is unfolding in Indiana where the Indiana Disciplinary Commission is recommending a one year suspension for Indianapolis attorney and blogger Paul K. Ogden, who criticized a judge in emails and refused to apologize for what he considered an exercise of free speech.

Ogden sent emails to another attorney accusing Hendricks Superior Judge David Coleman of mishandling an estate case. One particular email sent to opposing counsel Steve Harris of Mooresville said that Coleman “should be turned in to the disciplinary commission for how he handled this case.” That email is part of the position of hearing officer Robert W. York who finds that he “cannot stress enough the conclusion that (Ogden) has a profound lack of both insight into his own conduct and lack or respect for those who disagree with him in any way.” The case is disturbing on a number of levels including the commission’s position that Odgen should be punished because he believes he is “superior to the courts and the law” and that his criticism of Coleman was “filled with inaccurate claims and slanderous innuendo.”

Ogden insists that it was his criticism of the disciplinary process that led to the charges:

I have long felt that one of our responsibilities as attorney is to speak out about the need for reform of our legal system. While I have broached many topics for reform in the legal system, many times on this blog, it was not until January of 2011 when I first decided to touch the third rail and publish an article on the disciplinary process. That story included my research that during the last three years when the Disciplinary Commission was headed by Donald Lundberg, 397 of the 400 published disciplinary cases had been against small firm attorneys and sole practitioners. It was just a few months after that story that the relatively new Executive Secretary of the Commission Michael Witte began filing grievances against me which ultimately resulted in the charges that were heard yesterday.

I tend to favor the free speech values in such cases. In the Indiana, I fail to see how emails criticizing judges should be the basis for discipline. This is a matter of professional opinion. What do you think?

Source (for Pennsylvania story):

Penn LIve

48 thoughts on “Former Pennsylvania Congressman Suspended From Practicing Law Due To Criticism Of Judges

  1. Simmply want to say your article is ass amazing. The
    clarity in your post is simply spectaculpar and i can assume you are an expert on this subject.
    Weell with yoiur permission allow me to grab yoyr RSS
    feed to keep updated with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please keep
    uup the gratifying work.

  2. no comment, Jonathan? where is the passion for justice? writing about legal issues has its place. doing something to return the courts to their rightful, esteemed status is critical and of historical significance.

  3. I know this is an old story, but this is EXACTLY what is being written about in an article recently published on Family Courts and 1st Amendment violations, where attorneys are petrified of criticizing judges for fear of retaliation, quote:

    “Practicing lawyers in front of such judges are effectively silenced by the sheer occupational hazard of having to practice in front of the same judge they were complaining about. In many jurisdictions any such criticism is presumptively considered professional misconduct; for many such reasons attorney criticism would be professional suicide and all attorneys know it.”

  4. WordPress has been hacked by feminists, who hate the website, A Voice For Men, and have convinced the administrators at WordPress that the site is a hate speech site, which it is not.
    The above post is from an article on a voice for men website, called American Family Courts, the First Amendment, and Violations of Free Speech.
    Interesting how free speech is even being censored here on WordPress.

  5. I.M. Hipp – One tills, another one seeds, another one waters – etc…

    I harp at the Professor – all the time – for staying away from the risky;
    because he does good work and it is my wish for faster change that’s



    Gary T

    I feel ya – Free speech is free until it ruffles the wrong ——-

Comments are closed.