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?

6 of 185 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Reliable sources by BeauHD · · Score: 5, Informative

    NYT wrote about it, but it's a paywalled source. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05...

  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...

  4. Re:Reliable sources by dcooper_db9 · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    I do not block ads. I do block third party scripts.
  5. 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.

  6. Disgusting by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Lynch and Holder have run the most overtly corrupt (and therefore like most corrupt) DOJ in history.

    I don't care much for Trump but I sure as hell hope he wins at this point because we need someone with the stones to actually look into and prosecute members of the former administration for their misdeeds. I can understand why that isn't a precedent most politicians want to see set, but its the only way we are going to get things cleaned up.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html