California's unconstitutional laws removes lawyer's livelihood if they accept cases involving institutional, political or judicial corruption

May 05, 2008

By AHRC News Services

On March 2, 2008, Richard I. Fine a former member of the U. S Department of Justice , filed the attached federal civil rights suit in the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, Case No. CV-08-2906 DDP (CW) against the State Bar of California, its Board of Governors ,Richard A. Honn, Patrice E. McElroy, Joann M Remke, Judith A. Epstein, Maadge S. Watai, Ronald W. Stovitz, Lucy Armednariz, and Donald F. Miles, the individual judges of the State Bar Court and Scott J. Drexel, the Chief Trial Counsel.

The suit seeks to declare the California automatic "involuntary inactive enrollment" law unconstitutional as a violation of due process as it operates to remove a lawyer's livelihood without notice of any charges or hearing. The suit also seeks to declare the California "moral turpitude" law unconstitutional as it prohibits the fundamental First Amendment Right to "petition the government to redress grievances" i.e. bring and pursue lawsuits.

The suit also seeks to enjoin, i.e., stop the State Bar of California, its Board of Governors, the State Bar Chief Trial Counsel who is its "prosecutor" and the State Bar Court judges from enforcing these laws, against lawyers who bring lawsuits and file pleadings in court cases.

Fine stated: The State Bar is using these statutes in violation of the U.S. Constitution to squelch the right of free speech, to stop people from asserting their legal rights and to intimidate lawyers and discourage them from accepting cases where institutional, political or judicial corruption exists.

Fine continued: Where such corruption exists, it can only be exposed and removed through a vigilant populace embracing the services of strong principled advocates who seek decisions from a judiciary free of conflicts.

Fine continued: The use of unconstitutional legislation to squelch and silence this process, will destroy our judicial system and must be stopped now.

Fine concluded: This lawsuit is a necessary part of the process to free our judical system from the conflicts which have rendered it unable to fully serve the needs of our citizens. The other parts which we have proposed, are federal grand juries to prosecute and indict wrongdoers who corrupt the judicial system, and strong conflict of interest legislation to preclude "corruption" from occurring. This combined "prosecutorial", "legislative" and "judicial" approach will hopefully rid the judicial system of its "problems" and allow it to function in a free and open society "with equal justice for all."

A history of Mr. Fine's background is in the case which is attached.

Please sign the attached letter for the federal grand jury and e-mail it to the U.S. Attorney General and to your Congressperson requesting that they also request the federal grand jury and please send the letter with the proposed legislation to your federal and state representatives requesting that they introduce, support and pass the proposed legislation.

Also, please sign the Petition requesting that all court cases be revisited or nullified based on evidence of Financial Conflicts of Interest and Fraud committed by judges throughout the United States.

Together we can make this change.


Related news:
• AHRC EDITORS ASK CONGRESS TO REQUEST INVESTIGATION BY DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - Focus is on homeowner association lawyers and judges

• JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS FULL DISCLOSURE LAW
Proposed Law To Require Justices, Judges and Other Judicial and Administrative Officers to Disclose Conflicts of Interests

• JUDGES AND CAI FORECLOSURE LAWYERS WORK TO SHUT DOWN HOMEOWNERS WEBSITE - Voice of Homeowners Threatened with Extinction

• The Fire Bell In The Night And Our Real Terror - While We Debate Reverend Wright, The Economy Goes To Hell