|
Our Mission |
Big government is not simply the size of the budget, or the number of federal programs; it is the role the federal government plays in our daily lives.
We at the Lincoln Heritage Institute will not sit idly by and allow bloated bureaucracies, budensome tax policies, a failing public education system, and out of control regulatory system, and a growing disregard for the rule of law to become an accepted way of life
We have as our purpose, through public education, the revitalization and preservation of our traditional political, social, commercial, and legal environment in which the only limits to achievement are individual ability and effort. |
|
You Be the Judge |
by Paul R. Hollrah: LHI Contributor
On June 19, 2004, Judge Guido Calabrese of the Second Judicial Circuit of the United States (New York) attended an American Constitutional Society (ACS) Convention in Washington, DC. At that convention, Judge Calabrese made certain remarks that brought into question his fitness to serve on the federal bench.
For example, Judge Calabrese is quoted as saying that in December 2000, “in a way that occurred before but is rare in the United States, that somebody (George W. Bush) came to power as a result of the illegitimate acts of a legitimate institution that had the right to put somebody in power. That is what the Supreme Court did in Bush vs. Gore… The reason I emphasize that is because that is exactly what happened when Mussolini was put in by the King of Italy… That is what happened when Hindenburg put Hitler in…”
According to the New York Post, “Calabrese went on to say that the public should expel Bush from office to cleanse the democratic system (emphasis added).”
Not only were Judge Calabrese’s assertions wrong – the United States Supreme Court was forced to intervene in the Florida recounts in 2000 to prevent an unconstitutional
and politically motivated interference by the Florida Supreme Court – his remarks were totally inappropriate for a member of the federal judiciary.
On June 29, 2004, this writer filed a formal complaint against Judge Calabrese with the Second Circuit Judicial Council. In the weeks and months that followed, four additional complaints were filed. As a result, the Chief Judge of the Second Circuit appointed a special committee to investigate the alleged misconduct and to make recommendations for an appropriate punishment, if any, to the Second Circuit Judicial Council.
In a 16-page written order handed down on April 8, 2005, the Second Circuit Judicial Council reported its findings and its final disposition, as follows:
A. With regard to the appropriateness of speaking at the American Constitutional
Society (ACS) Conference, the Council finds that the charge that speaking at an ACS event constitutes political activity “does not withstand analysis” under Canon 7 (A) (2) (“A judge should not… make speeches for a political organization…”). Although the ACS has a well-earned reputation as a “left leaning” organization with a “partisan mission and agenda,” it is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit organizations and that, “for the foregoing reasons, the claim is dismissed.”
B. With regard to the content of the Judge’s remarks at the ACS Conference –
asserting that the president should not be reelected, etc. – the Judicial Council found that Judge Calabrese was in violation of Canon 7 when he made the statement, saying, “We conclude that all of the purposes of the judicial misconduct provisions are fully served by: the Judge’s apology; Chief Judge Walker’s June 24, 2004 Memorandum (accepting Judge Calabrese’s apology); the release of that apology and Memorandum to the public; and the Judicial Council’s concurrence with the admonition in the Memorandum.”
C. With regard to comparing the president to Hitler and Mussolini, “The Judicial
Council concluded that no additional action was necessary based on the comparison language because the Judge acknowledged that the comparison was a mistake and has apologized for the ACS remarks, and because there is no precedent or authority clearly defining the comparison remarks as misconduct… (emphasis added)”
D. With regard to the general allegations of political bias, the Council ruled that
“To the extent that any of the complaints are based on the belief that the Judge’s alleged bias renders him unable to sit as a judge in a case involving the President… they are (at least) premature as any such claim would await an actual instance. The general ‘political bias’ claims are dismissed.”
E. With regard to the Judge’s disagreement with Bush vs. Gore, the Council
ruled that, “As shown by the closely divided (5-4) vote in the Bush vs. Gore decision itself… reasonable people disagree over the soundness of the opinions in that case… Nothing in the Judge’s comments about that decision raises an issue of competence.”
In summary, Judge Calabrese was found guilty of a violation of Canon 7 of Judicial Ethics. He was admonished by the Chief Judge of the Second Circuit and forced to make a public apology, but that is all. Can anyone spell “w-h-i-t-e-w-a-s-h?”
It reemphasizes the question, should men and women of Judge Calabrese’s caliber sit on the highest courts in the land? Should the president continue to search for and nominate the most conservative “strict constructionist” judges? And should Senate Republicans bring an abrupt end to the Democrats’ unconstitutional use of the filibuster to block the appointment of qualified conservative judges?
You be the judge.
|
|
|
Lincoln Heritage Institute lhi@wmis.net
620 Hall Street, Eaton Rapids, MI 48827
In Pennsylvania, 603 N. 3rd. St., Harrisburg, Pa.
Box 656 Main St., Pleasant Valley, NY, 12569 Fax (517) 663-5245
|
|
