Month: January 2018

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://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

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

A. The time has come for the exposers of sexual abusers and the exposers of unaccountable abusive judges to join forces

1. This is the most propitious time to expose abusers in government and everywhere else because:
   .
   a. the public is ever more dissatisfied with a government that can get hardly anything done and has broken down to the point of provoking the shutdown; and
   .
   b. the exposure of VIP Harvey Weinstein and other sexual predators of his ilk has led to the transformation of silent abusees into a self-assertive public, whose MeToo! attitude (†>OL2:611§B) is and must be extended(OL2:622) to become this:

Enough is enough!
We won’t take anybody’s abuse, including judges’, anymore.

* † The materials corresponding to the (parenthetical blue references) are found in my study of judges and their judiciaries, 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

1. The public, considered as We the People, is the only source of political power in “government of, by, and for the people”(*>jur:82fn172). Thanks to that status and the huge number of their members, the People constitute the only entity powerful enough to expose and hold accountable the most firmly established component of the Establishment: the mighty, life-tenured judges of the Federal Judiciary, a single member of which can suspend nationwide the Muslim travel ban of the President, who campaigned on issuing it and was elected by more than 62.5 million voters.

2. Since federal judges are the models for their state counterparts, if the former are exposed and held accountable, the trend will develop to do the same with regard to the latter.

3. Judges do not hold each other accountable when they receive complaints about one of their own and sit as judges judging judges(†>OL2:609§1). Instead, they dismiss all complaints against them to self-exempt from discipline(OL2:646¶8; 609§1).

4. Appellate judges are not forced by a mere brief on appeal to correct the abuse of power of the judge below appealed from. As shown in “The math of perfunctoriness and wrongdoing”(OL2:608§A), appellate judges do not even read the vast majority of those briefs.

5. Politicians maintain a conniving relation with the individuals that they recommended, endorsed, nominated and confirmed or appointed to judgeships and thereafter consider as ‘their men and women on the bench’(OL2:610§3) so that they will not hold them accountable.

6. So, judges abuse their power(OL2:453, 608§A; *>jur:5§3) to do whatever they want because they are held by themselves and politicians unaccountable and can get away with it, their duty to abide by the requirements of due process and equal protection of the law notwithstanding(OL2:641¶2).

B. The out-of-court inform and outrage strategy to expose judges’ abuse and its joint implementation with other exposers of abusers

1. As a result of judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless abuse, pursuing in court a local, personal case(†>OL2:578) in an effort to obtain ‘justice in accordance with the rule of law’ is an exercise in futility.

2. This fact warrants the out-of-court inform and outrage strategy(OL2:639) for exposing judges’ abuse. It calls for informing the public about judges’ abuse of their power and thereby provoking such outrage at judges that the public unites to do what it is entitled to do as We the People: assert their status as the masters of all public servants, including judicial public servants, to hold them accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse, and adopt reformative measures to prevent judges’ abuse and detect and punish abusive judges.

3. We, exposers of judges’ abuse, can implement this strategy by joining forces with the exposers of those who engage in sexual and any other kind of abuse, e.g., pay discrimination and exclusion from corporate leadership positions, such as the MeToo!(OL2:635), Time’s Up, and Women’s March movements(OL2:513, 515).

4. Together we can advance what constitutes our common cause: to expose all kinds of abusers, hold them accountable, make them compensate their victims, and adopt meaningful anti-abuse reforms under the control of We the People.
   It is in other exposers’ interest that we all join forces because judges’ abuse harms more(†>OL2:607¶2) people, i.e., the parties before them as well as the rest of the public due to their decisions’ scope of application, even national, and precedential effect; and because their harm is more severe since they wield power to dispose of people’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame their lives.

5. With the support of more abusees, we can develop more cost-effectively the civil courage, and journalistic, legal, and legislative means for them to expose their abusers and hold them accountable.

6. We can become the collective generators of a transformative and permanent product: a culture of intolerance of abusers. It is in that culture that we can make progress toward realizing the ideal of “Equal Justice Under Law” and attaining the goals of equal pay, equal opportunity, and equal access to “the Pursuit of Happiness”. We can enhance our respective public standing as advocates of the common good of the largest and most powerful constituency: We the People.

C. Concrete, realistic, and feasible means of implementing the strategy

1. Campaign to inform the public about judges’ abuse and make it an issue of national discussion

1. The distribution of information about judges’ abuse(cf. OL2:608§A) can be carried on through:

a. mass emailing, mailing, and social media campaigns;

b. presentations(†>OL2:623) to journalists(OL2:612, 620,621, 630); at law(OL2:641) journalism(OL2:644), business, and Information Technology schools; and professional associations(OL:197§G), such as bar associations, think tanks, and public defender entities; and

c. alliances with other exposers of abusers, such as the MeToo! (OL2:622, 639), Time’s Up, and Women’s March(OL2:529, 530) movements.

1.  QUESTION: How can you, whether directly or indirectly, put us in touch with the top officers of these movements, schools, and associations with a view to my making a presentation to them on why it is in their interest that we join forces to expose abuse of any kind committed by anybody against any member of We the People?

2. Insert the issue of judges’ abuse in the campaigns for the 2018 primaries and mid-term elections

1. An informed and outraged public can force politicians, lest they be voted out of, or not into, office, to make an Emile Zola’s I accuse!-like denunciation(†>OL2:611§B) of judges’ abuse. They must make it a centerpiece of their platforms and repeat it at their rallies and townhall meetings.

3. A Let’s hear it call for public hearings on judges’ abuse

1. Likewise, an informed and outraged public can demand public hearings where people can testify about their experience of abuse by judges. Deponents’ collective testimony will make it possible to draw a detailed and complete picture of the nature, extent, and gravity of judges’ abuse(>OL:154 ¶3). This picture will make it possible to identify the most confirmable, reliable, and persuasive kind of evidence: patterns, that is, patterns of abuse, not dismissable as the abuse of a rogue judge and capable of revealing the coordinated and institutionalized nature of judges’ abuse(>jur:49§4).

2. The hearings are the indispensable first step to holding judges accountable through substantive means based on ‘dots’ of abuse connected into patterns by the public rather than pro forma means(†>OL2:6473 >28 U.S.C. §§351-364; *>jur:21§1) intended to protect politicians-judges’ conniving relation(OL2:610§3). The general picture with its specific patterns of abuse will outrage the People so deeply that reformative means whose adoption seems inconceivable today will become inevitable(jur:158§§6-8). Hence the superiority of public hearings over private comments(OL2:607¶1).

3. Before the background of that picture and the foundation of those patterns have been established, there must be no discussion of how to reform judges’ status, powers, and abuse-enabling secrecy(*>jur:27§e). A premature discussion can be intended only to stress the obstacles to judicial reform and evade the outrage that the public hearings will provoke and that will push through the reform.

1) Public hearings conducted first by the media and then by lawmakers

1. The public can demand that the hearings be conducted for the first time ever by the media, investigative journalists, and news anchors in their commercial, career, and public interest (†>OL2:612, 613). This can be the means of forging an equally unprecedented alliance between the media and the People, and avoiding the manipulation of the hearings by politicians.

2. Indeed, politicians defend foremost their conniving relation(OL2:610§3) with ‘their judges’ and their privileges in the Establishment. However, the public can require that politicians confirm their I accuse! denunciation of judges’ abuse with an equally repeated Let’s hear it call for nationally and statewide televised public hearings, similar to those held by the Senate Watergate Committee, as the fact-finding act that sets in motion the unstoppable bandwagon to reformative legislation.

4. Form a coalition of talkshow hosts

1. Exposers of abusers can join forces to promote the formation a coalition of talkshow hosts(†>OL2: 571¶23d) who invite their audience to share their experience of abuse by judges and other abusers. Hosts can become Champions of Justice and their coalition a powerhouse of American politics.

5. Investigate the interception of the communications of critics of judges

1. Independent and reputable Information Technology experts can be hired to examine the evidence of interception of the communications of critics of judges(†>OL2:633§D, 583§3, 526¶56). This is what CBS and Then-CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson did, who is now suing the Department of Justice for $35 million on a charge of having hacked her work and home computers(OL2:633§D).

2. Hardly any other finding of the public hearings and the proposed investigations (next) of judges’ abuse can provoke more widespread and intense public outrage than that those with the most to lose from being exposed, judges, have abused their vast computer network and expertise, and power to deprive their critics of their 1st Amendment rights to “freedom of speech, of the press, [and] peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”(*>jur:2212b).

6. Proposed journalistic investigations

1. Exposers of abusers can entice journalists and journalism students to investigate judges’ conduct at judicial meetings and seminars, and reconstruct their conversations near ‘little people’ that are invisible to them, such as drivers, frontdesk staff, waiters and waitresses, and maids(†>OL2:646§D). They can follow the leads(>OL:194§E) of two unique national stories(OL2:598) apt to reveal judges’ money grabbing(OL2:614), concealment(>jur:65fn107a,c), and laundering(jur:105fn213).

7. Make a documentary on judges’ abuse

1. The documentary Black Robed Predators(*>jur:85; †>OL2:464) on judges’ abuse can be of such high quality and informative value, and can so deeply outrage the public as to stir it up into the 2018 primaries and mid-term elections; and force politicians to issue their I accuse! denunciation of judges’ abuse and make their Let’s hear it call for public hearings thereon.(OL2:536, 537).

2. On my capacity to write an informative, entertaining, and commercially viable script, see:

a. How Sec. Clinton stole the show at the charity gala, causing Mr. Trump to concede that “She’s such a naspy, naspy woman”, and the strategy that she devised to turn “naspy” into the theme that would win her the election(OL2:491)

b. Trump and the Four Chicks (starring the four co-chairs of the Women’s March(OL2:530)

c. Behind the Black Robe Wall(*>cw:58)

d. Punting on the Digital River(*>cw:32)

e. the synopses of eight completed movie scripts and novels(*>cw:3)

8. Analysis of the official statistics of the courts

1. The credibility of my study† of judges and their judiciaries is based on my original and meticulous analysis of official statistics of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts(>jur:10-14; 21§§1-3; †>OL2:453, 546, 548); and state courts(†>OL2:608§A).

2. Exposers of abusers can encourage and guide similar studies containing statistical, linguistic, and literary analysis(>jur:131§§b, c) to be undertaken, in general, by the public, and, in particular, by professors(>dcc:5) and students(>OL:115) at law, journalism, business, and Information Technology schools(OL:60); lawyers and journalists(OL:194§E); developers of software for lawyers(>OL:42; †>OL2:588); pro ses(OL:274, 280, 304), and others.

9. Development of a clearinghouse for complaints about judges, and a center for research and coordination and funding of litigation thereon

1. This website –http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org(†>OL2:575)- can be developed into a clearinghouse for complaints against judges to be uploaded and retrieved by complainants and others.

2. Search engines and other digital applications can be developed for anybody, but especially people conducting analytical studies and those with cases before the same judge, to detect points of commonalities that reveal patterns of abuse and bias(supra §8).

32. Patterns of judges’ abuse can give rise to a flood of motions for recusal, disqualification, reversal, etc., that can throw judiciaries into turmoil and highlight their abuse as an electoral issue.

1. The development of the website and the center are the precursors of the creation of the for-profit(*>jur:119§1) Institute for Judicial Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy(jur:131§5).

10. Fundraising to implement the strategy to expose judges’ abuse

1. Nothing that is worth doing can be done without resources, whether they be manpower, a computer network, a physical office, utilities, supplies, postage, or the most versatile of all of them, namely, money. That requires raising funds through donations, bankrolling initiatives(†>OL2:528), and capital investment(OL2:560, 577).

QUESTION: Can you make a donation? It should not fall to one person the tasks of conducting professional-grade law research and writing –which is an intellectually exhausting and time-consuming effort engaged in at the expense of a gainful activity-, and distributing by email and mail the articles so produced while combatting judges’ interception of such communications, and in addition be the one to bear alone the financial burden of it all.

Critics of judges need to put their money where their mouth is. While whining about judges is free, exposing their abuse through strategic thinking(†>OL2:635, 593¶15; *>jur:xliv§C) and implementation is not. Far from it, exposing powerful judges’ abuse, just as exposing VIP sexual predators, is quite expensive.
So is doing what has never been done in history: enabling the People to assert their right to hold their judicial public servants accountable and liable to compensate their victims.

The thoughtful nature of this email as well as of the rest of the study*† with its more than 1,150 pages is evidence of Dr. Cordero’s capacity and determination to apply your donation conscientiously to advance our common cause.

Donate through this button

subscribe for free to this series of articles thus:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
> + New or Users >Add New

D. You too need to take action now, before the beginning of the mid-term campaigning, to advance our common cause

1.  Each of us has to take action now: Time is of the essence to implement the above strategy through the described means in order to take advantage of the opportunity that the mid-term elections will give us to advance our common cause of exposing abusers of any kind and holding them accountable and liable to compensate their victims.

2. The bustling environment of election campaigning will impart impulse to the means that we, exposers of judges’ abuse, want as vehicles for advancing our cause of judicial accountability and reform:

a. the formation of a Tea Party-like single issue movement(*>jur:164§9) that asserts the People’s right to hold all public servants, not only judges, accountable for rendering the services that they were hired to provide to and on behalf of their masters; and liable for their dereliction of duty and abuse of power: the People’s Sunrise(OL:201§J); and to do so

b. the convocation by Congress of the constitutional convention that since April 2014, 34 states, i.e., the 2/3 of all of them required under Article V of the Constitution, have petitioned it to convoke. The convention is necessary to replace the dysfunctional and entrenched two-party system with a new form of People-government relation. A new constitution is necessary to address the many topics that did not exist in 1789(OL2:516¶8); and enable the People to hold Judges Above the Law from the safe haven of their judiciaries down to the People’s level where The Law is Equal for All.

E. An offer to make a paid presentation on the joint exposure of all abusers

1. The convention is the vehicle that will bring all exposers of abusers forward if we climb on, and steer, it jointly. But we need not wait until then to work together. In fact, a lot of preparation and practice are needed in order to harmonize interests and resolve conflicts(†>OL2:593¶¶15-16), earn each other’s trust, and develop the means and habit of cooperation.

2. Thus, I offer to make a presentation on advancing jointly our common cause to you and t your group. It must be a paid presentation, for if you do not have some skin in the game, this aphorism applies:

What is received for free
[such as the two volumes of my study of judges and their judiciaries* †, my articles, and access to my website at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org] and can be dropped at no expense, is not appreciated…

and I am left alone on the sidewalk holding the bag of uncompensated painstaking effort, the presentation materials, and all the expense bills. It is not fair to make me run that risk or to require that I keep giving without receiving anything in exchange. To produce and advertise the presentation you may share this article widely.

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

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

I encourage you to donate to the effort to hold judges accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse. One of the intended uses of donated funds is the development of the website at http://www. Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ as a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by the public and searched by anybody for commonalities revealing patterns of all types of abuse(*>OL:274; †>OL2:592, 563).

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

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://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

You, the Reader,
are encouraged to share this article as widely as possible,
especially with all those people and entities,
such as the officers and members
of the MeToo!, Time’s Up, and Women’s March movements,
who strive to expose abusers of any kind and
hold them accountable and
liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.

Share and post it in its entirety,
without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to this website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

You are also encouraged
to donate through the button below
to the effort to enhance this website
as a clearinghouse for complaints against judges
to be uploaded and researched by anybody
in search for points of commonalities that reveal
one of the most persuasive types of evidence of abuse:
patterns of abuse.

 

A. The circumstances forcing the Chief Justice to cease tolerating harassment

1. Last December 18, former 9^th Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski unexpectedly announced that he was resigning with immediate effect rather than defend against the numerous sexual harassment accusations that had been brought against him.

1. His resignation was shocking because he had been on the bench for 35 years. Despite the vast number of IOUs that he must have collected during his above-average long career, he could not cause the accusations to be dismissed by his peers or prevent their referral to the 2^nd Circuit for investigation by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.

2. On the contrary, Chief Justice Roberts announced on December 31, in his 2017 Report on the Federal Judiciary^[1] the formation of a working group to review the handling of sexual harassment complaints. Therein he wrote “I have great confidence in the men and women who comprise our judiciary. I am sure that the overwhelming number have no tolerance for harassment”.

[1]  http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/2017yearend_report_Chief_Justice.pdf

1. Chief Justice Roberts made that statement only after some 700 letters of complaint^[2] that he had received from former and current clerks made his silence risky in the wake of the exposure by the media of the accusations by fewer than 70 women of sexual abuse by Harvey Weinstein; their overcoming of their fear of his retaliatory career enders and intimidatory practices; and the exposure of other VIPs as sexual predators. The clerks’ fear of retaliation and lack of recourse in the Judiciary against judges’ abuse could no longer ensure their silence given a receptive media and MeToo! public.

[2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/chief-justice-roberts-says-courts-will-examine-protections-against-sexual-harassment/2017/12/31/94a55d00-ee40-11e7-97bf-bba379b809ab_story.html?utm_term=.9e953ba213a9

B. Means of abuse: confidentiality agreements and retaliatory end-of-clerkship letters

1. Judges, whether federal or state, have means of suppressing any complaint about their abuse of any kind and of anybody: The first means is the confidential agreement that judges require clerks to sign before clerking for them.

2. Clerks are people who just graduated from law school, most are young, and clerk for a judge for one year before getting their first regular law job. They are saddled with a huge law school debt. They are vulnerable financially.

3. It is prestigious to clerk for a judge because they can choose the best candidate –a Supreme Court justice hires three– among those who apply.

4. So judges pay clerks only a modest salary. The complement comes in the form of a glowing letter of recommendation at the end of the clerkship. It can earn a clerk a signing up bonus from her or his new employer worth $100,000s -a clerk to a justice commands a $250,000 bonus- because the clerk has gained precious knowledge of the workings of, and contacts in, a court, the decision maker.

5. A ‘poor’ letter is devastating, branding the clerk as a persona non grata in that court, or incompetent as a lawyer. That is what a clerk gets if he or she dare complain about any abuse by the judge.

6. If the clerk finds a job, its salary establishes the floor for future salaries.

7. If a clerk complains in a way that her or his hiring judge alleges to be in breach of the confidentiality agreement, the judge can bring suit, most likely under seal, before the judge’s peers. They decide any motion by the clerk for their own recusal. They have similar agreements with their clerks and the same interest in having them enforced to their benefit. If a judge goes against another judge, he or she becomes a treasonous, unreliable pariah among all of them.

8. It follows that clerks stand no chance of winning against a judge.

9. The above illustrates how to understand and influence the workings of a group of people by applying dynamic analysis of harmonious and conflicting interests as the foundation for strategic thinking(^†>OL2:593¶¶15-16).

^{† *} The materials corresponding to the parenthetical (blue text references) are found in my study of judges and their judiciaries, 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

C. Official knowledge of the Federal Judiciary’s statistics on systematic dismissal by judges of complaints against them

1. Chief Justice Roberts, as a former law student, law clerk to Judge Friendly and Justice Rehnquist, and appellate judge, and as the current chief justice who hires clerks, cannot pretend not to have known for decades how judges use their recommendation letters to ‘purchase’ the right to abuse clerks; extort their silence; and compensate them for their abuse.

2. He has imputed and official knowledge of how judges abuse sexually and otherwise, clerks, parties, and the rest of the public. Official knowledge denies the availability as a defense of willful ignorance and blindness and supports intentional dereliction of duty(*>jur:90§§b-d):

a. Under 28 U.S.C. §601^[3], the Chief Justice is charged with appointing the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts^[4], the one whom he “asked…to assemble a working group to examine our practices and address these issues” concerning sexual harassment and complaints thereabout.

[3] http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28usc_Judicial_Code.pdf 

[4]  http://www.uscourts.gov/

b. Under §604a(3), the director is charged with submitting an annual report^[5] to the Judicial Conference of the United States set up under §311, whose president is the Chief Justice and whose other members are the chief circuit judges and representative district, bankruptcy, and magistrate judges.

[5]  http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/analysis-reports/judicial-business-united-states-courts

c. Under §604h(2), in that report, the director is required to “include…the number of complaints filed with each judicial council under chapter 16 [the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, §§351-364], indicating the general nature of such complaints and the disposition of those complaints in which action has been taken”.

1. That Act provides for any person, including a judge and even if not the victim of the abuse, to file with the chief circuit judge a complaint about the misconduct or disability of any judge in the circuit.

2. Chief Justice Roberts has known officially^[6] that when Then-Judge, Now-Justice Gorsuch served on the 10^th Circuit(^†>OL2:548) and Then-Judge, Now-Justice Sotomayor on the 2^nd(*>jur:11; 24²⁰), 99.83% of complaints against judges were dismissed and that without investigation; appeals from those dismissals to the respective circuit council, set up under §332(a) (1), were denied up to 100%(jur:24§b). Those percentages hold true for the other circuits(jur:10).

[6] E.g., http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/complaints-against-judges-judicial-business-2016. The official statistics on complaints against judges for the year in question appear on Table S-22, e.g., http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics/table/s-22/judicial-business/2016/09/30 .

1.  The Chief Justice and the associate justices have official knowledge that judges abuse the self-disciplining authority granted them under that §351 Act of Congress so as to exempt themselves from any discipline:

a. Under §42^[7], he and each of the associate justices are allotted to one or more of the 13 circuits as circuit justices; and under §45(b), preside over any meeting of their respective circuit’s judicial council^[8].

[7] 28 U.S.C. §42. Allotment of Supreme Court justices to circuits. The Chief Justice and the associate justices of the Court shall from time to time be allotted as circuit justices among the circuits by order of the Court.

[8] 28 U.S.C. §45(b)….The circuit justice, however, shall have precedence over all the circuit judges and shall preside at any session which he attends.

b. Under §332(g), each council “shall submit a report to the Administrative Office on the number and nature of orders entered under this section during the preceding calendar year that relate to judicial misconduct or disability” ^[9] under §351.

[9] On the two-way flow of official information that reach the circuit justices and the Chief Justice through the Administrative Office, see also

28 U.S.C. §332(a)(6)(c). The chief judge shall submit to the council the semiannual reports of the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. The council shall take such action thereon as may be necessary.

1. Hence, Chief Justice Roberts knows that he misled the public when he wrote in his 2017 Report1 that he and the other justices and judges “have no tolerance for harassment and share the view that victims must have clear and immediate recourse to effective remedies”.

2. Judges not only tolerate each other’s abuse. They have institutionalized the self-interested abrogation in effect of the §351 Judicial Conduct and Disability Act by unlawfully dismissing systematically all complaints against judges, thus ensuring their impunity by depriving complainants of ‘recourse to any remedies’.(*>jur:21§§1-3)

3. If a complainant files with the Department of Justice a complaint against a judge, he or she is referred to the Act and the judges that apply it(>jur:78fn^{159, 160}), for the very last thing that the Department wants is to become the target of judges’ retaliation(>Lsch:17§C) if the Department were to investigate the complained-against judge.

4. After President Trump criticized two federal judges, they suspended nationwide his Muslim travel ban(^†>OL2:641¶3). President Roosevelt had a similar experience(jur:23¹⁷).

5. When presidents and their Justice Department are powerless against judges, what ‘recourse to any remedies’ does a newbie, unconnected, puny clerk have against abusive judges and their peers closing ranks behind them as they shout in unison, “Don’t you ever mess with us!”(*>jur:22¶31)?

D. Complaint processing rules can be suspended by any of their implementing judges to exonerate their peers and tolerate their abuse

1. Chief Justice Roberts stated in his 2017 Report^[1], “I expect the working group to consider whether changes are needed in our…rules for investigating and processing misconduct complaints”.

2. He and his colleagues drafted and adopted those rules^[10]. They provided under Rule 2(b) “A Rule will not apply if…a chief judge, a special committee, a judicial council, the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability, or the Judicial Conference expressly finds that exceptional circumstances render [its] application unjust or contrary to the purposes of the Act or these Rules”.

[10]  http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/judicial-conduct-disability/faqs-filing-judicial-conduct-or-disabili ty-complaint. Cf. http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/judicial_complaints/DrCordero_revised_rules.pdf

1. The Rules are not mandatory, but rather discretionary with every officer or entity authorized to apply them; any of them can get any abusive judge ‘off the hook’ of the complaint. The Rules are illusory, a sham intended to deprive any complainant of any “recourse to effective remedies”.

Chief Justice Roberts has abused We the People with his pretense that judges have “no tolerance” for judges’ abuse. Through self-interested coordination, they even have a scheme to get away with it.

E. Journalistic investigation of judges’ common knowledge of their abuse

1. Chief Justice Roberts and the other justices and judges attend the meetings of the Judicial Conference, the judicial councils, and/or the circuits’ §333^[3] judicial conferences, all of which are held anywhere, mostly in fun cities.

2. They also attend seminars and speaking events organized by private parties, e.g., corporations that can afford them as occasions for publicity and lobbying and may pay for all their judicial guests’ expenses, which is prohibited due to the risk of bribing. So, judges frequently fail to report their attendance at them(jur:146²⁷²). The late Justice Scalia is reported to have attended more than 250 of them.

3. For most judges, these are out-of-town meetings and may include a hotel stay. Judges have lots of fun, particularly at the party in the suite of a chief judge or the seminar host.

4. After they have had lots of whisky, cognac, lobster, caviar, waitresses and waiters too catering to them, their tongues move from serious conversations on valuable, especially if confidential, information to fun ones on how they abusively cut their workload(“The math of perfunctoriness and abuse”, ^†>OL2:608§A) and manhandle clerks: It is time for Hollywood Access-type of outboasting each other.

5. Drivers, bar attendants, maids, and similar little people invisible to VIP judges have lots of fun information and are not bound by confidentiality agreements.

6. They and clerks, who can be turned into insider informants(jur:106§c; ^†>OL2:468), should be contacted by journalists who find statistics and statutory provisions too dull for themselves or their audience.

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

I encourage you to donate to the effort to hold judges accountable and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse. One of the intended uses of donated funds is the development of this website, http://www. Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, as a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by the public and searched by anybody for commonalities revealing patterns of all types of abuse(*>OL:274; ^†>OL2:592, 563)

Donate through this button

subscribe for free to its series of articles thus:

http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
> + New or Users >Add New

As a call to join forces in a coalition to expose abusers of any kind and hold them accountable and liable to compensate their victims, share this article with the officers and members of the MeToo!, Time’s Up, and Women’s March movement and all those who shout self-assertively:

Enough is enough!
We won’t take judges’ and anybody else’s abuse anymore.

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

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
New York City
http://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, RicCordero@verizon.net,

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at * >ggl:1 et seq., when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

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