Slashdot Mirror


Judge Orders 'Intentionally Deceptive' DOJ Lawyers To Take Remedial Ethics Class (zerohedge.com)

According to the Daily Caller, "The judge overseeing the challenge by 26 states to President Obama's executive action in immigration has ordered all lawyers 'employed at the Justice Department in Washington, D.C. who appears, or seeks to appear, in a court (state or federal) in any of the 26 Plaintiff States annually attend a legal ethics course.'"

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Zero Hedge: In writing the ruling, Hanen quoted from the scene in "Miracle on 34th Street" when the boy is called to testify to Santa's existence and saying that everyone knows not to tell a lie to the court. Hanen went on to say that that the Justice Department lawyers have an even stricter duty: Tell the truth, don't mislead the court, and don't allow it to be mislead by others. "The Government's lawyers failed on all three fronts. The actions of the DHS should have been brought as early as December 19, 2014. The failure of counsel to do that constituted more than mere inadvertent omissions -- it was intentionally deceptive." Judge Hanen wrote in his ruling. Hanen ordered that the classes must be "taught by at least one recognized ethics expert who is unaffiliated with the Justice Department." I wonder if the judge could order the lawyers to jail for contempt of court?

8 of 185 comments (clear)

  1. Reliable sources by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not saying the story's wrong, but could you have found better sources than the Daily Caller and Zerohedge?

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:Reliable sources by DaHat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The major question here is if the judge has the jurisdiction to issue this order.

      Apparently you've not been keeping up with the degree of unethical behavior by the DoJ in this case.

      He does not.

      And you are a credible authority on this... because?

      Considering the implications of a judge barring every justice department lawyer from any courtroom in 26 states,

      Even IF he doesn't have the authority to do so, he has fired a beautiful warning shot across the bow of the DoJ and given serious ammunition to each of the 26 states fighting the unlawful amnesty which can & will be used in state courts given the behavior of DoJ lawyers before this judge.

      I'd say he has overstepped his authority.

      So finally, you acknowledge that this is in your opinion... which unlike that of the judge, has zero legal authority.

      This judge should be removed from the bench.

      How exactly do you envision that happening? The republican controlled House & Senate (which for the most part agree with the State's suit) impeaching them?

      Yeah, good luck with that.

  2. Equal Justice Ha Ha Ha... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When a judge rules that a member of the Peasant Class has been intentionally deceptive; they do hard time for the crime of perjury. Has anyone written an app to cross reference: wealth, political affiliation, political connections, legal immigration status, and whether you are a member ofthe Bar, etc. to decide what laws apply to you and in what way. It gets complicated.
    Nixon can't wipe 18.5 minutes of magnetic audio tape but Hillary can wipe all the platters on a magnetic hard drive. See, it gets tricky.

  3. Whine much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Both articles quote the judge's order and then... y'know... LINK the order.

    And you scream "I'll believe it when a source I approve of says it?" (HINT: And not the judge's actual order...)

    Bet you would've said the same if Slashdot had posted a Daily Kos article about a judge slamming Bush' DoJ...

    1. Re:Whine much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Wow... did I strike a nerve? Because NEITHER of you complained when slashdot posted articles from Daily Kos and just happily lapped it up like the kool-aid drinkers you are.

      There's a search button... it works.

  4. The Same OBama DOJ by Crashmarik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whose attorney general Eric Holder waited until after the statute of limitation expired to decide whether or not to prosecute banks, then went to work for the same banks at a 10 million+/ year salary ?

    The same DOJ whose attorney general Loretta Lynch has been doing such a wonderful job on defending constitutional rights like proclaiming she would prosecute anti muslim hate speech in the wake of the San Bernadino attacks, would not prosecute Lois Lerner for abuse of office at the IRS, and will likely let Hillary skate on her violations of national security law ?

    Well I am shocked that attorneys from that DOJ would have ethics violations.

    1. Re:The Same OBama DOJ by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the Democratic Party wonders why Bernie supporters are refusing to do as they're told and get behind Hillary, and why some are threatening to vote for Trump.

  5. Oh. It's the Birther Judge... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The same judge who took (and is still taking!) Orly Taitz' birther case seriously. Really.

    So the deal is that a judge who is so unethical and biased that his decisions are guaranteed to be reversed on appeal still has some power -- before he makes a decision. So he keeps the cases going on and on, throwing around the full power of a federal judge, even though he's a nationally recognized disgrace. Basically if WorldNetDaily had the power to appoint judges, they'd have a hard time topping this clown.

    Why not impeached yet? It would require Congressional action, and his antics draw conservative praise while not actually causing any long-term harm since they'll be overruled. So he's there for life.