rule of law. Their effectiveness, however, has been limited. For one thing, a) many complaints and initiatives deal with the manifestations of the judges’ abusive conduct rather than the circumstance enabling their riskless wrongdoing, to wit, their inapplication to themselves of the mechanism of judicial discipline. In addition, b) the public has not yet been made aware of the extent of the judges’ abusive conduct and the fact that it concerns everybody because judges have enormous power to take decisions that affect every person’s right to life, freedom, and property as well as every social and economic activity in this country. Moreover, c) the entities and individuals have pursued their complaints and initiatives separately against judges, who, by contrast, are united within a most powerful, well-connected, and moneyed organization, namely, the Judiciary, the Third Branch of Government, which provides the institutional framework for a more insidious and intractable type of wrongdoing: coordinated judicial wrongdoing.

II.     A three-pronged proposal to pursue a common mission through a virtual firm, win the public’s support, and cause the reform by law of judicial discipline

6.     A proposal is made here to overcome these three obstacles to the effectiveness of the entities and individuals’ many initiatives against abusive judges that show bias and disregard the rule of law. To begin with, it identifies what constitutes their essential common mission, namely, to restore integrity to our legal system. For its accomplishment, it proposes that they c) unite their efforts and resources to create a virtual firm on the Internet of investigative journalists and lawyers to b) make the public aware of how and why judges abuse their rights by exposing evidence of their wrongdoing through a media campaign and a class action against wrongdoing judges aimed at gaining the public’s support to a) force executive and legislative authorities to launch official investigations into coordinated wrongdoing in the judicial branch leading to public demand for, and passage of, reform legislation that creates an external body for administering judicial discipline and inspecting the judges’ use of public funds. Through this program of activities the entities and individuals can embark on a common mission to deal effectively with the cause of their complaints: the judges’ unlawful, intentional failure to discharge their self-discipline duty, which enables them to eliminate punishment as a deterrent to wrongdoing and to engage in coordinated wrongdoing that leads to abuse and corruption in our legal system.

7.     This proposal, by its very nature flexible and open to discussion, is addressed to the entities and individuals as a statement of a concrete way in which they can combine their efforts and resources in order to pursue effectively their common mission. It is also addressed as a recruitment presentation to “the best of the best, most committed, and most informed”, those professionals whose quality of work can make the difference between a successful undertaking and a disappointing flop, and who demand to know before coming on board what specific functions they would be performing in a well-run firm. Likewise, it is addressed as a business plan at the pre-quantified stage to financial supporters, those with the cash and business connections and experience necessary to turn a project into a going business, but who want to make sure that an initial general idea has been thought through to a chronological series of precise activities for specific types of workers resulting in a product that people want out there in the real world. Here the business is a lofty mission: to restore integrity to our legal system so that it can produce judicial decisions that are just and fair when measured against the benchmark of “Equal Justice Under Law”.