by Bill Scheidler, Candidate for State Representative, 26th District, Position 1
It is simple. Our society depends upon the rule of law and the ‘fair and impartial’ adjudication of grievances. In practice, however, “the rule of law and a fair and impartial” system, when government misconduct is concerned, is manipulated by the legal establishment — including judges — and perverts the “true” values of our society.
Our early WA State Legislature, circa 1891, recognized the danger in judges using their power improperly to manipulate the law by the power they have. That is why the legislature enacted RCW 4.40.010, which still remains the law today and states,
“The common law, so far as it is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, or of the state of Washington nor incompatible with the institutions and condition of society in this state, shall be the rule of decision in all the courts of this state.”
This LAW, is suppose to keep the “PEOPLE” in control of how our society treats its citizens, especially when government conduct is at issue. The problem is our judges of today won’t let the common law (i.e., the will of the people envisioned by our legislature of 1891) take its natural course. Today the “manipulation” of the common law, by the legal establishment, is the practice to “tailor” or create ‘artifical’ common law to advance ‘special interest’ and NOT the interests of our society. In other words, lawyers and judges purposely prevent the evolution of the common law because it would shift power from the “legal establishment” to the people.
For example: Imagine an issue of State Oppression such as the oppression of a family by overly zealous employees of the Dept of Child Services (DSHS) – a child is improperly removed from its parents. EVERY attorney, by law, must come to the aid of this family if requested. Failure to do so is a failure to abide by the statutory oath, RCW 2.48.210, all lawyers take that mandates an attorney shall “NEVER REJECT THE CAUSE OF THE OPPRESSED”. However DSHS has their own lawyers and big law firms defending their every move – despite the “oppressive conduct” by DSHS. Lawyers’ duty is to “come to the rescue of the oppressed” NOT DEFEND the OPPRESSOR. A JUDGE is suppose to insure laws are followed, not rendered irrelevant. [Government labor unions play a big part in this upside-down conduct]
Unfortunately the legal establishment has a vested interest in “ignoring their duty” –it is all about MONEY, POWER and CONTROL. If the “legal establishment” actually followed the law, Government “oppression”, in any form, would be purged from the system and those who are at fault – FIRED! The number of “lawsuits” would be reduced too by ridding the government of corrupt or incompetent employees. But that isn’t in the best interest of lawyers — lawyers want more “unlawful conduct” and bigger government, not less, to insure the prosperity of the profession.
FOR THIS REASON ATTORNEYS MUST NOT SIT IN REVIEW OF THEIR OWN CONDUCT! The WA State Bar must be a “citizen oversight” agency of the legal profession and NOT under the judicial br.
As it is, attorneys make up the WA State Bar [WSBA] and have the sole power to decide for themselves the meaning of their oath, the ethics of the profession, and whether or not a lawyers conduct meets the standards set by that oath. The WSBA fails in its public duty to hold lawyers to their duty for the reasons noted above.
” They [WSBA] won’t prosecute attorneys from larger firms and target sole practitioners. They use illegal tactics to determine outcomes against those they choose to prosecute.” Bob Grundstein J.D.
And if you what evidence that judges violate the law…attached is an audio snippet from a motion hearing “Scheidler v Executive Director, Commission on Judicial Conduct and Associate Director, WSBA, et. al.” at which I objected to a WA lawyer Keith Harper, under RCW 2.28.030 from acting as judge when the judge is ‘directly interested’ in the subject matter of the case. Judicial conduct is the subject matter! Also noted in my pleading is the ‘ethical requirement’ that states judges shall disqualify themselves under the Code of Judicial conduct CJC 2.11, when a member of the judges ‘family’ is interested in the subject matter of the case. In this case the Judge’s son is a lawyer and the WA Bar is being sued – clearly the judges son has a vested interest in the Bar’s policies. Here is the Judge’s response to my request he disqualify himself under the law – “try the moon or Mars.”
Common sense would lead anyone to ask, who is on the hook to pay for this increase in city, county, state – liability… these increasing lawsuits? As a matter of fact the ultimate liability will be born by insurance companies and/or taxpayers. For an insurance company there is no upside to insuring larger government, because larger government means more lawsuits. How does government protect itself from its self-created increasing liabilities…. ***it rigs the system*** — likely with the help of Judges, Insurance Companies and LARGE LAW FIRMS that are employed by cities, counties and insurance companies.
So who really PAYS in a rigged system … the person standing in front of the Judge who believes she/he is getting a “fair” trial…. if she/he even gets a trial. In other words, “JUSTICE” is sacrificed!
SURPRISED? … it is “moral inbreeding” at work! Unless you are happy with a rigged justice system, the status quo isn’t for you. If you recognize the damage to the very principles embodied in the definition of “justice”, please vote for me as 26th District State Representative, Position 1.
Thanks for reading,