Federal Judge Spanks DOJ Lawyers Over Lawless Amnesty Lies

God bless Judge Andrew Hanen, one of  the few patriots in the government who has stood up to the King Barack the First.

amnesty

Granting amnesty by imperial decree is fun!

From The Washington Examiner:

A federal judge has ordered annual ethics classes for Justice Department attorneys as a punishment for being “intentionally deceptive” during litigation over President Obama’s executive immigration orders.

“Such conduct is certainly not worthy of any department whose name includes the word ‘Justice,'” U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen wrote in a withering order released Thursday.

Justice Department attorneys misled the court about when the Department of Homeland Security would begin implementing President Obama’s executive order granting “deferred action” to illegal immigrants whose children are citizens. In doing so, they tricked the 26 states who filed a lawsuit into “foregoing a request for a temporary restraining order,” according to the judge.

The facts of the deception are not in doubt, Hanen emphasized. “[DOJ] has now admitted making statements that clearly did not match the facts,” he said in the May 19 opinion, first noted by the National Law Journal. “It has admitted that the lawyers who made these statements had knowledge of the truth when they made these misstatements … This court would be remiss if it left such unseemly and unprofessional conduct unaddressed.”

As punishment, Justice Department attorneys who wish to appear in any state or federal court within the 26 states that brought the lawsuit have to undergo annual ethics training. “At a minimum, this course (or courses) shall total at least three hours of ethics training per year,” he wrote. …

Hanen cited multiple instances in which Justice Department attorneys claimed that Department of Homeland Security directive announced in November of 2014 would not be implemented until February 18, 2015, even though they knew that DHS had begun implementing a portion of the order that pertained to the original “deferred action for childhood arrivals” policy announced in 2012.

“Apparently, lawyers, somewhere in the halls of the Justice Department whose identities are unknown to this court, decided unilaterally that the conduct of the DHS in granting three-year DACA renewals using the 2014 DHS directive was immaterial and irrelevant to this lawsuit and that the DOJ could therefore just ignore it,” Hanen wrote. “Then, for whatever reason, the Justice Department trial lawyers appearing in this Court chose not to tell the truth about this DHS activity. The first decision was certainly unsupportable, but the subsequent decision to hide it from the Court was unethical.”

“For whatever reason,” your Honor, these dirtbag attorneys chose to lie? Let me remind you, of what I always say, the Left lies.

15 comments

  1. “Those are the same renewals that the Government’s trial counsel, according to the Government’s brief, knew had been occurring since early December of 2014. Despite this knowledge, counsel did not alert the Court to this ongoing activity until March 3, 2015—some two weeks later. This should have been done immediately—especially given the bad faith representations counsel had already made.”
    (Bottom of page 11- to 12)
    The court was told on March 3, a week after Holder left office on April 27.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Holder

  2. Ethics classes? Is that really going to make any difference? How about holding some of the liars in contempt and sending them to lock-up for a while. Would that judge let one of us lowly peasants off so lightly if we were caught lying to the court? I don’t think so. Government officials should be held to a higher standard.

    • Robert,
      These lawyers have a lot to do. For every Justice Dept. lawyer to take 3 hours of ethics classes (no online bs, mind you) to be able to practice in any of these 26 states is quite a burden. You and I might liken it to writing 500 times “I must not tell a lie” on the blackboard, but to these self important trolls it is a full day shot in the ass.
      So for the next 5 years look for clever lawyers to delay their cases until after the first of the year so as to require proof from the smelly leaches of DC to have to provide proof of their compliance.

      More importantly, this shows a willingness of this administration to circumvent normal decorum. Specifically, all those cases that never heard the light of day because of “standing” now look more like they were contrived to obtain the objective where that objective was not ever “the truth”.

      • Thanks for your comments and clarification, Mensa.

      • Thank you Mensa. I’m sure that it will be a hassle for the attorneys involved but it sounds like a bad joke. “Did you hear the one about the judge that ordered a bunch of government lawyers to take ethics classes?” I think that such egregious behavior should be punished with sterner measures.

        • Tar and feathers, perhaps? I would have liked Hannan to name names. As it is I have to go back to the briefs and get the names off the signature pages. Imagine being a litigant against one of these lying SOBs. “Your honor, I see what I am being charged with, but this attorney is a known liar, so I don’t know if these are real charges.”
          Sounds like great fun to me.

          • Tar and feathers. That’s the spirit, I like the sentiment. I think that stripping them of their cushy government jobs and sending them on their way to fend for themselves in the private sector would be a good start. Disbarring them from further practice of the law seems appropriate as well. If an attorney doesn’t get in trouble for lying to a judge what other standard could they possibly be held to? How many people have been sent to prison by various agencies controlled by the DOJ because they lied to investigators? Attorneys on the DOJ payroll demonstrably lying to a judge seems like a much more serious transgression to me.

          • I couldn’t agree more. I would have like to have seen Judge Hanen also report each of these attorneys to the disciplinary commissions in each state where they are admitted to the bar, something he may have also done without publicizing it, because you’re absolutely correct. If lawyers are willing to deliberately and pre-meditatedly lie to a judge they have no business continuing to be members of the Bar, IMO.

          • Maybe that would be a fun project, M; that is, getting these names, finding out where they are licensed, and contacting the disciplinary commissions in their states so that investigations could be opened against them. It’s the least we can do.

  3. Last time I visited the Judicial Inquiry Board I had spelled out each and every canon the judge violated with evidence. They don’t inform you as to how the matter is settled, they just send you a note that it was resolved. Employee rights and all that crap.In my instance, I was informed my complaints were unfounded.

    Those judges that are about to be sanctioned take early retirement. I have even seen one judge who went off the deep end be treated with rehab and retirement. It’s the good-ol’ boy network.

  4. Yes, M. It’s a racket.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

The Teri O'Brien Show

book
%d bloggers like this: