Posted on 05/19/2016 3:12:42 PM PDT by Lockbox
A federal judge has ordered annual ethics classes for Justice Department attorneys as a punishment for being "intentionally deceptive" during litigation over President Obama's executive immigration orders.
"Such conduct is certainly not worthy of any department whose name includes the word 'Justice,'" U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen wrote in a withering order released Thursday.
Justice Department attorneys misled the court about when the Department of Homeland Security would begin implementing President Obama's executive order granting "deferred action" to illegal immigrants whose children are citizens. In doing so, they tricked the 26 states who filed a lawsuit into "foregoing a request for a temporary restraining order," according to the judge.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
“It appears that the Lawyers did not break the law, just professional ethics.”
An attorney who intentionally attempts to defraud the court has broken the law.
Good luck proving "intentionally", especially with the leftists infesting the DoJ. They'll cover for each other, stall, hide the evidence, even lie yet again. Truth and integrity have no place with these rats.
Their whole purpose is to advance the progressive agenda, no matter what the cost to societal morality, personal morality, professional standards, and any other conceivable standard.
If Trump is elected, he needs to fire every last attorney in the DoJ, EVERY ONE, and start over.
They were just following orders. She should arrest their skinny chain smoking transgender boss in the White House.
Keelhaul the lot of them.
But what of the prop?
Give them some extra weight, so the will stay below the prop.
Yep. The judge is confusing ethics and integrity.
I also believe perjury can be applied to lawyers who intentionally misrepresent facts or omit critical evidence. Maybe the charge would not be perjury as such, but it would rise to that level.
Who says a lawyer cannot knowingly lie? A lie is by definition telling what one knows is an untruth. Modified sometimes by “to one who has a right to know” (doesn’t everyone almost) and/or “with the INTENT to deceive”
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.