SC nominee, Neil Gorsuch, “An attack on one of our brothers and sisters of the robe is an attack on all of us”

By: The Reluctant Activist

By

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net,
DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

This article may be republished and redistributed non-commercially,
provided it is without any addition, deletion, or modification, and
credit is given to its author,
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

Justiceship Nominee Neil Gorsuch reportedly said that: “An attack on one of our brothers and sisters of the robe is an attack on all of us”

Guided by that we-against-the-rest-of-the-world mentality, he and his peers in the 10th Circuit have protected each other by disposing of the 573 complaints filed against any of them during the 1oct06-30sep16 11-year period through self-exemption from any discipline except for one reprimand, a 99.83% dismissal rate; they also dispose of 93% of appeals with reasonless decisions.

The concern is not whether he favors big corporations over the little guy, but whether anybody protects us from them: UNACCOUNTABLY INDEPENDENT JUDGES, WHO RISKLESSLY ENGAGE IN WRONGDOING.

The demand for public hearings of complainants and parties that he and his peers have dumped out of court.

After President Trump issued his first immigration ban, Federal District Judge James Robart of the 9th Circuit suspended it nationwide. The President referred to him disparagingly as “this so-called judge”. When his justiceship nominee, Judge Neil Gorsuch, who sits on the Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, paid a goodwill visit to Congress in anticipation of his confirmation hearings, he was asked about the President’s reference and he reportedly remarked that “An attack on one of our brothers and sisters of the robe is an attack on all of us”.
.

2. His remark was confirmed by the conduct of the three-judge appellate panel of 9th Circuit judges who unanimously upheld the nationwide suspension to send Trump a warning: ‘Don’t you ever mess with us!’

.

3. J. Gorsuch too has been practicing his remark. As a circuit judge for the last 11.5 years, he has tolerated and/or participated in the systematic dismissal of the 573(L:3) complaints against judges in his circuit and the systematic denial of petitions to review such dismissals(L:65, 68).

.

4. He and his peers have protected their own, taking only one corrective action, a reprimand. Their system of self-exemption from discipline is 99.83% perfect in effect. That statistic is representative(stat:1-60) of how the judges in the other circuits dispose of complaints against themselves: in self-interest and with total disregard for complainants, other parties, and the rest of the public. They are left exposed to the judges’ self-ensured unaccountability, which inevitably leads to their riskless wrongdoing. What would your boss do if he or she could risklessly do anything to you and anything for himself or herself and his or her peers?

NOTE: The file at: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_hearings_JGorsuch_complainants&parties.pdf and
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >ol2:546 contains materials corresponding to the (blue text references) herein as follows:

.

(1) the composite statistical table, next, with the Line(L:#) of the pertinent heading or entry concerning complaints filed against federal judges in the 10th Circuit during the 2006-2016 tabulated years;

.

(2) its source, that is, the official1 statistical tables(stat:page#) concerning the complaints filed in each of the 13 circuits and two national courts during the 1996-2016 21-year period for which such statistics are available;

.

(3) the endnotes[#] with explanations about the composite statistical table and/or links to the official statistical tables; and

.

(4) the table template for you and other readers to tabulate a similar composite table for any such circuit or national court. Let Readers point to the judges’ own official statistics to:

a) show the judges’ abusive dismissal of complaints against them and their self-exemption from any discipline; and

b) demand congressional hearings on the experience with them of yours and other complainants, parties, and the rest of We the People.

.

This article and all other (blue text references) are supported by Dr. Cordero’s study of judges and their judiciaries based on original research of official documents. The study is titled and downloadable thus: Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing: Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting* †

.

* Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page number up to ol:393

.

† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >from ol2:394

A. How complaint statistics are produced and the message that they send to Congress and the public

.

5. Each circuit collects its statistics and sends them to the Administrative Office of the U.S Courts (AO)[1]. The latter’s director is appointed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court, and must include them in his Annual Report to the Judicial Conference of the U.S., which is presided over by the chief justice and gathers all the chief circuit judges, and representative district, bankruptcy, and magistrate judges. The Report is also submitted to Congress and the public. Hence, J. Gorsuch and all his peers send annually an unambiguous, unabashed message to all politicians and us:

.

‘We have rendered the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act that you, politicians, passed in 1980[2] to set up the complaint mechanism useless. You, the public, waste your time complaining against us, for we take care of our own. We are so powerful that we can just as easily suspend a presidential order nationwide as doom to failure a whole legislative agenda by declaring each of its laws unconstitutional. And we are untouchable! In the last 228 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, only 8 of us federal judges have been impeached and removed.(*>jur:22fn14) We can engage in any wrongdoing, for we are our own police. We are the Judges Above the Law of the State Within the state.

B. J. Gorsuch values getting along with his “brothers and sisters in the robe” higher than getting justice done

.

6. J. Gorsuch stated as a badge of honor at the hearings that of the 2,700 cases in which he has participated as a panel member 97% have been decided unanimously. He added with pride “that’s the way we do things in the West”…as if there were a justice of the East and it were any different.

.

7. With that he did not mean ‘because in the West judges morph into each other to surmount the differences inherent in being appointed by either Republican or Democratic politicians, discarding the different views that we held in college, which led me to found the opposition paper The Federalist.’

.

8. Rather, he confirmed the AO statistics that show that circuit judges dispose of 93% of appeals in decisions “on procedural grounds [e.g., “for lack of jurisdiction or jurisdictional defect”], by consolidation, unsigned, unpublished, without comment”(†>ol2:455).

.

9. The majority of these decisions are reasonless, fiat-like summary orders(*>jur:43§1). They fit the front side of a 5¢ form, with one rubberstamped operative word, mostly ‘the decision below is Affirmed or the motion is Denied’. They express the morphed judges’ pro-forma justice: ‘However things were, we leave them so. Next!’

.

10. The rest of those 93% decisions have an opinion so arbitrary, ad-hoc to reach a convenient result, or unlawful that they may not be relied upon in other cases; so they too are marked “not-precedential”, which is anathema to our system of common law based on precedent. Only the remaining 7% of decisions are signed, published, and intended to pass the scrutiny of the media, be discussed in law journals, and included in law school casebooks to establish the author’s reputation.

.

11. What criteria does J. Gorsuch use to treat parties so unequally: dumping their appeals with a meaningless decision or sweating it out on a meaningful one?

.

12. In fact, he also bragged that in 99% of his cases he had been in the majority. This means that in only 1% of them he felt so strongly about the issues or the parties to go to the trouble of dissenting, thus being in the minority. Nevertheless, he remained a typical judge within the norm, for the 2% of cases where it was one of the other two panel members who dissented can be distributed equally by allocating 1% to each of them.

.

13. For him and his peers getting along with each other and taking it easy with 93% of appeals are more appealing attitudes than a principled discharge of their duty. The latter requires reading the briefs, doing legal research, and coming to the panel conference prepared to advocate “a result compelled by the law”, which he said a good judge pursues.

.

14. No wonder he shied away from the exacting and socially lethal action of denouncing any of his peers or even protesting publicly their systematic dismissal of complaints against them, which would have entailed a lot of controversy and led to his peers outcasting him as a traitor.

C. The Senate’s debate should concentrate on the pro-forma justice that J. Gorsuch and his friends provide to parties and the rest of We the People

.

15. So the question for the senators to ask before voting on J. Gorsuch is not whether what got under his skin in that 1% of cases in which he stood up for something other than his camaraderie with his peers was a big corporation or a little guy.

.

16. Rather, it is how he could claim commitment to rule of law results, never mind integrity, although during the past 11.5 years on the bench he has seen his peers dismiss on average one complaint a week of those 573 against them, but has simply looked the other way or even joined the other bullies in abusing their judicial power to silence complainants by resorting to false pretenses(L:44-50) to dump their complaints.

.

17. Why did he tolerate, or participate in, the cheating of parties out of the meaningful appellate service to which their payment of the filing fee entitled them contractually?

.

18. By ensuring his and his peers’ unaccountability, they have abused their independence to provide themselves an irresistibly tempting and impenetrable cover for their riskless wrongdoing.

D. The need for Congress to hold hearings on the experience at the mercy of unaccountable judges of complainants, parties, and We the People, the masters of all judicial servants

.

19. It is not by mounting a filibuster against J. Gorsuch that senators, or by watching it while remaining inactive that the House members, should handle his confirmation. It is by holding public hearings for the complainants and the parties to appeals that he and his peers have dumped out of court and deprived of equal justice under law.

.

20. Holding those hearings will not be an attack on judicial independence. As representatives of We the People, the only source of sovereign power and the masters of “government of, by, and for the people”, Congress has the duty to defend and enforce the People’s right to hold all their public servants, including their judicial public servants, accountable and liable for their wrongdoing.

.

21. Those hearings will be the product of an overdue application of the principle that in ‘government, not of men and women, but by the rule of law’, judges are not allowed to arrogate to themselves unaccountable independence. Their continued holding of office as public servants depends on their faithfully and competently serving their masters, the People.

.

22. President Trump said in his inaugural speech, “We are transferring power from Washington, D.C., and giving it back to you, the People”. Let him and Congress put those words into practice. Let us, the People, demand that he and Congress hold public hearings to find out the masters’ experience at the mercy of their judicial servants, the most powerful of all public servants, who have trampled justice to climb to a position by definition for wrongdoers: Judges Above the Law.

23. To that end, send this article to your senator – https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/- and other representatives –e.g., http://www.house.gov/representatives/- and share and post it as widely as possible.

Visit the website at, and subscribe to its series of articles thus:
www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org> + New or Users >Add New

.

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com, Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@cantab.net

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Visitors since August 2016

wordpress stat
Back to Top
Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com