D.C. Circuit Judge Janice Rogers Brown has long been controversial since her nomination was opposed by many for what were viewed as extreme view as a member of the California Supreme Court. She was finally confirmed in a deal in the Senate that many denounced as a surrender by Democrats. Now Brown has used an opinion to denounce “powerful groups” and courts for limiting “Cowboy capitalism” that she says has been “disarmed” in America.
Category: Lawyering
Jury selection began yesterday in Greensboro, N.C., in the federal trial of former presidential candidate John Edwards. Because of the extremely prejudicial aspects of Edwards’ infidelity while his wife was battling cancer, voir dire and pre-trial motions in limine will be critically important in the case. Equally important will be the legal basis for the campaign finance charges in the case over the use of third-party funds to hide his affair with Rielle Hunter. In my view, the charges stretch the law too far but the government will still have to convince a jury. The greatest danger for the defense remains the prejudicial elements and how they may warp the jury’s view of the facts and legal standard.
Continue reading “Jury Selection Starts In Edwards Case with Controversial Campaign Finance Charges”
My colleague and fellow torts professor, Roger Schechter, came across this perfect gift for the law student or lawyer who has everything. Do they have a Palsgraf teeshirt? Well, they need one.
Continue reading “Looking For That Perfect Gift From Your Legal Love Muffin? Look No Further”
We have previously discussed the abusive tenure of former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and his unethical conduct in conjunction with Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In a triumph of ethical ethics, a three-member disciplinary panel of the Arizona Supreme Court has now issued a 247-page opinion (below) disbarring Thomas and one of his former deputies, Lisa Aubuchon, as well as suspending another former deputy county attorney (Rachael R. Alexander) for six months and a day for prosecutorial abuse. In the action, the Arizona Bar not only upheld the integrity of its membership of lawyers but all lawyers. In response, Thomas has denounced the decision and compared himself to Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. The bar seems to have a different image in mind. It began its analysis with this quote from Proverbs 12:15–17: “The way of a fool seems right to him, but a wise man listens to advice. A fool shows his annoyance at once, but a prudent man overlooks an insult. A truthful witness gives honest testimony, but a false witness tells lies.”
Continue reading “Former Maricopa County Attorney Thomas Disbarred; Compares Himself To Gandhi”
The State Bar of California is seeking the disbarment of Linda Nell Lowney, 54, an attorney accused of taking advantage of an ailing and elderly client thirty years her senior. Lowney was the attorney for Thor Tollefsen in handling his estate planning. However, she switched from Thor’s hammer to his hubby in 2006. Thor’s relatives in Norway allege that Lowney proceeded to take his money and effectively abandon him. He died later in a nursing home. The bar investigators agreed and recommended disbarment.
ABA President Wm. T. (Bill) Robinson III has issued a statement criticizing President Obama’s statement that voting against the health care law would be “judicial activism” In a letter to the Wall Street Journal, Robinson called the remarks “troubling.”
Continue reading “ABA President Criticizes Obama For Judicial Activism Comments”
While Michigan’s Attorney Grievance Commission sought disbarment, a state discipline panel headed by Assistant United States Attorney William Sauget has handed down only a 90 day suspension for Detroit City Attorney Valerie Colbert-Osamuede. Colbert-Osamuede who is accused of lying to the Detroit City Council, a Wayne County Circuit Court judge and the Attorney Grievance Commission about a settlement and alleged coverup benefitting then-mayor (and now convicted felon) Kwame Kilpatrick. Despite this trifecta of false statements and the panel’s conclusion that she was still not sure she is telling the truth, Sauget’s panel still refused to hand down a disbarment or something more substantial as a punishment.
By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Joshua Thompson, 20-ish, of Livonia, Michigan loves the movies, but could not understand why his soda pop and candy purchase rang up the till for another $8.00 on top of the price of admission. In the same cinema, popcorn and a soda can run you $11.00. Rather than just griping, he filed a consumer class action suit in Wayne County (Michigan) Circuit Court on behalf of us all to get some answers.
While the White House and the President backtracked from Obama’s recent statements regarding the Supreme Court, Attorney General Eric Holder succeeded in reigniting the controversy by calling the comments about judicial activism “appropriate.” As I noted earlier, the effort of the White House to modify the statement of the President notably did not include a retraction of the judicial activism statement. Holder’s statement appeared to reaffirm that the omission was intentional.
Continue reading “Doubling Down: Holder Calls Obama’s Judicial Activism Criticism “Appropriate””
Yesterday, President Barack Obama made the surprising prediction that the Supreme Court would uphold the health care law and further labeled those who would vote against it as judicial activists. I am not sure what he is basing his prediction on, but the comment on judicial activism is both unfounded and unwise.
Submitted by: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
A recurring meme used in American society by leaders and politicians is that certain acts must be done to “Defend Our Freedoms”. The use of this meme has occurred repeatedly in our history as a justification for certain governmental actions, particularly in defense of war. In some cases like our Revolution, or World War II its usage has been right on point, in others like Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan it’s been used as untruthful propaganda. On national and local levels the meme has also had a mixed history. It has been used to persecute radicals, as a States Rights justification of “Jim Crow” and post 9/11 to enact “security” legislation that many of us think actually diminishes freedom in the name of saving it. Continue reading “Defending Our Freedoms?”
Last night, the police released this video showing George Zimmerman shortly after he killed an unarmed Florida teen. I discussed the legal significance of the video on Countdown last night.
Continue reading “The Immaculate Assault? Police Video Shows Zimmerman Without Obvious Injuries”
As I mentioned on Countdown last night, my Supreme Court class (which reviews the leading cases of the term and deliberates as an alternative Supreme Court) ruled on the constitutional challenge over the individual mandate provision (we will be considering the other issues in a separate class). The class ruled 12 to 2 to reverse the 11th Circuit and uphold the health care law. The class also voted on the ethical question of Kagan’s recusal as well as their prediction of what that other Court would do. The associate justices were not sway by the stated concerns of the Chief Justice (here and here) over the future of federalism if the Act is constitutional.
Was the first day of arguments over the health care law historic . . . or just a giant practical joke? Paul Clement, representing the 26 states challenging the law, said the first day of arguments in the litigation was “a kind of practical joke that the court is playing on the public.” It would not seem the most politic comment to make when you will be seeing these nine jokers in the morning.
The facts behind the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida continue to slowly emerge. I have previously stated that I view critical facts as murky for a prosecution — even though I believe that there was sufficient evidence to arrest George Zimmerman at the scene. While we have still not seen some of the forensic evidence, a new report indicates that police may have based their initial decisions in part on the statement of a witness. We have been discussing the maddening gap in witness testimony at the critical moment of the confrontation. Now a new report suggests that there may have been a witness to the struggle and that witness reportedly told police that it was Martin who was on top of Zimmerman before the fatal shot was fired.