Posted on 05/19/2016 8:43:23 PM PDT by Whenifhow
That part of the order is at the end:
The Court does not have the power to disbar the counsel in this case, but it does have the power to revoke the pro hac vice status of out-of-state lawyers who act unethically in court. By a separate sealed order that it is simultaneously issuing, that is being done.
It's too bad that the second order is sealed. I think US taxpayers deserve to know the name of these scumbags. Yes, they would have been the target of some harassment, but if they realize they could be held personally and publicly accountable, they might have had some second thoughts about lying to the judge.
I will also point out that the judge singles out a subset of the US DoJ lawyers for praise:
The Court notes that to its knowledge none of the acts cited in this or prior orders were committed by attorneys from the United States Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Texas. To date, without exception, these attorneys have acted and continue to act, in this Court’s experience, with honor, professionalism and forthrightness.
I still think the judge should file a complaint with the appropriate bar associations. He may not have the ability to disbar the offenders, but he can certainly make their life difficult in the future. With such a mark on their record, no significant law firm would ever hire them.
From the order:
Therefore, this Court, in an effort to ensure that all Justice Department attorneys who appear in the courts of the Plaintiff States that have been harmed by this misconduct are aware of and comply with their ethical duties, hereby orders that any attorney 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. It shall be taught by at least one recognized ethics expert who is unaffiliated with the Justice Department. At a minimum, this course (or courses) shall total at least three hours of ethics training per year. The subject matter shall include a discussion of the ethical codes of conduct (which will include candor to the court and truthfulness to third parties) applicable in that jurisdiction. The format of this continuing education shall be left to the independent expert lecturer. Self-study or online study will not comply with this Order, but attendance at a recognized, independently sponsored program shall suffice.
“...unaffiliated with the Justice Department”
Well that’s a relief! Thank you for the information.
No, but the DOJ can!
Amen
They are enemies of the Republic and should be treated as such
Article by Andrew McCarthy worth a read
Have not read anything in National Review since the incident about the anti-Trump movement.
McCarthy makes the same arguments that Judge Nap has said about this ruling.
There is one thing - it could come back to his court if scotus rules 4-4.
Hanen might have been wrong to issue this particular ruling, but perhaps he was embarrassed that he was duped.
and
DHS admits it’s still violating judge’s order on immigration amnesty
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3434642/posts
...less than a week after the judge delivered a vicious spanking to the administration for repeatedly bungling the case. Leon Rodriguez, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said as they were preparing for their latest update to the court, they discovered three more three-year amnesties they had sent out, after Judge Andrew Hanen had ordered them not to
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.