Posted on 06/05/2008 10:07:31 AM PDT by dcarey
It is inherently dangerous to confer the coercive powers of government upon a guild. Exhibit A: the Arizona State Bar, which is on a rampage to suppress free-speech rights.
The Bar has initiated several complaints against Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas in regard to his critical comments about Superior Court judges and his office’s efforts to recuse a judge for allegedly failing to enforce a voter initiative. Wise and temperate or not, such criticisms are at the core of constitutionally protected speech, and the Bar’s campaign against Thomas is sure to chill the exercise of those rights.
Thomas enlisted several prominent lawyers and ethics experts to provide affidavits in support of his special action contesting the bar’s enforcement actions in the Arizona Supreme Court, including the distinguished former Bar president, Ernest Calderon. The Bar responded by unanimously voting to replace Calderon as a delegate to the American Bar Association. State Bar president Daniel McAuliffe stated ominously, “Maybe he shouldn’t have filed the affidavit.”
The Bar also has voted to officially oppose the proposed initiative that would ban racial preferences in government employment, contracting, and education. The Bar likely would use compulsory membership dues of members who strongly support the initiative—a form of compelled political speech that also violates constitutional guarantees.
The Bar’s many roles—prosecutor, judge, enforcer, lobbyist—are ill-suited for a single entity. Several legislators have proposed stripping the Bar of its disciplinary functions, and they should also make membership voluntary. In the meantime, the Arizona Supreme Court should exercise its supervisory authority to prevent abuse of the Bar’s sweeping powers. The rule of law requires neutral law enforcement, but one of the components of that process in Arizona has become a strident partisan.
It will be hard to believe for most , but the Bar Association is a far better guardian of the public trust than a prosecutor . Prosecutors need to accept and respect the system too .
Not in this case. Ernest Calderon lead the Bar’s ethics investigation of the Bar itself, and he found the Bar in error. Retired AZ judges are using the Bar to investigate Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas after he did this:
Charges citizen-approved Proposition 100 being thwarted
Charging that a senior trial court judge has ignored the law denying bail to illegal aliens, (The daily paper insists on calling such lawbreakers “migrants.”) Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, has demanded that Judge Timothy Ryan remove himself from cases involving his office. Ryan is the assistant presiding criminal judge.
Thomas has sought outside legal counsel to move forward with his claim, stating that Ryan has repeatedly exhibited bias against enforcing the provisions of voter approved Proposition 100. Passed last year by an overwhelming 78 percent of Arizona voters, the measure denies bond to illegals charged with serious felonies.
Earlier this week, the Arizona Court of Appeals, in a unanimous decision, upheld the Proposition’s constitutionality.
(snip)
The state bars are supposed to provide public confidence in attorneys who are members of the bar by keeping attorneys ethical. The state bars have no business getting involved in politics as they have done lately. Unfortunately, they have been taken over by the left.
The Bar Association is trying to take revenge on Thomas who forced several judges (now retired) to implement an anti-illegal alien resolution that was overwhelmingly passed by the electorate.
Thomas deserves our support.
The bar has no business in this matter at all. It needs to be reined in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.