****************************

I. Effectiveness through unity: many entities and individuals complaining separately about wrongdoing judges, who are tightly coordinated in the Judiciary, the 3rd Branch of Government

1. There are many entities and individuals that complain on the Internet, talk shows, and e-mails about our federal and state legal systems. They protest about judges that abuse their judicial power either to advance their own ideological agenda with disregard for the respective constitution and laws that they swore to apply or to gain an unlawful benefit for themselves and others participating in a corrupt scheme. In short, they all complain about wrongdoing judges.

2. In neither case is the source of their complaints acts within the bounds of judicial power that the appeal courts have failed to correct. Rather, in both cases the source is judges that have failed to apply to themselves the statutory mechanism of judicial self-discipline. In the federal jurisdiction, this mechanism is triggered when a judicial conduct complaint against a federal judge is filed by any person with the chief judge of the respective court of appeals, as provided for by the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980. (28 U.S.C. §351 et seq.)

3. The failure to discharge their self-discipline duty allows judges to do anything they want and get away with it in the knowledge that they will not be asked by their peers to answer for their conduct. That knowledge results from, and gives rise to, coordination to engage in wrongdoing. Evidence of such coordination is found in the official statistics of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. They show that the judges’ rate of dismissal for over a decade of judicial conduct complaints could not have occurred but for their wrongful coordination to systematically dismiss them in order to insulate themselves from any discipline. (http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/Statistics_of_systematic_dismissals.pdf) Thus exempting themselves from the control of their conduct provided for by the Act constituted abuse of power. It engendered the sense of impunity that encouraged any subsequent abuse of power. Self-exemption from discipline and abuse of power acting as mutually reinforcing cause and effect of each other.

4. Federal judges’ sense of not being answerable for their actions to any disciplinary body is grounded in facts. As stated by the Late Chief Justice W. Rehnquist and the Federal Judicial Center, since the adoption of the U.S. Constitution in 1789 only 13 judges have been impeached and only 7 convicted…in 217 years of federal judicial history. Since their chances of getting caught are less than a third of those of becoming the 18^th chief justice of the Supreme Court, they engage in wrongdoing because they know that as a historical fact they are exempt from prosecution. As a result, federal judges constitute the only group of people in our country that as a matter of fact are above the law.

(http://judicial-discipline-reform.org/docs/CJ_Rehnquist_impeachments.pdf)

5. Many entities and individuals have complained repeatedly about, and developed different initiatives against, the many ways in which abusive judges manifest their bias and disregard for the

Dr. Cordero’s Programmatic Proposal to unite entities & individuals to ensure integrity in our courts 2 of 10

1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ 10; all in PDF Summary in PDF Table of Tasks