In the 224 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, the number of federal judges –2,131 were in office on 30sep11, including the Supreme Court justices– impeached and removed is 8! Such historic assurance of irremovability in practice has given them the sense that they are unaccountable and can act with impunity. As a result, throughout their lifelong appointment they abuse their power to engage risklessly in individual and coordinated wrongdoing.(jur:2¶¶4-5)
*NOTE: All (parenthetical) and [bracketed] blue text is references to supporting passages and footnotes, respectively, found in the study, Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing: Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting. That study is in the file downloadable through this link. In the study and everything else in the file, the blue text represents active cross-referential internal links that facilitate jumping to supporting passages and footnotes to check them. Start at id. >ol:55.
A. Two unique cases and the queries guiding their investigations
Federal judges’ wrongdoing(jur:5§3) can be exposed by the investigation of two unique cases that will not fail to draw the attention of a national public already so distrustful(ol:11) of government and its top politicians. Their investigation can be guided by these two queries:
The Obama-Sotomayor case and the Follow the money! investigation
What did the President(jur:77§5), Chief Justice Roberts, and other justices and judges know[23b] about Justice Sotomayor’s concealment of assets(jur:65§1) –suspected by The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico[107a]– and consequent tax evasion and when (jur:75§d) did they know it? (For an estimate of J. Sotomayor’s concealed assets, see[107c].)
The Judiciary-NSA case and the Follow it wirelessly! investigation
To what extent do federal judges abuse their vast computer network and expertise –which handle hundreds of millions of case files (Lsch:11¶9b.ii)– either alone or with the quid pro quo assistance of the NSA –whose requests for secret surveillance orders are rubberstamped by the federal judges of the secret court established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)– to conceal assets –a crime under U.S. law, unlike surveillance– by electronically transferring them to secret inland and offshore(ol:1) accounts to launder money of its illegal origin and bring it back as legitimate assets, and to protect wrongdoing judges by interfering with the communications –also a crime (ol:20¶¶11-12)– of complainants (ol:19§D)?
B. The implications and consequences of the investigations
The findings of these investigations can show that justices and judges have failed to “avoid even the appearance of impropriety”[123a] and give rise to calls for them to be impeached or to resign, as J. Abe Fortas had to on May 14, 1969. They acted either as principals by doing wrong or as accessories by tolerating (88§§a-d) it. In any event, they were remiss in their individual and collective duty to safeguard judicial integrity; and disregarded in their own personal or judicial ‘wrongdoing family’ interest the key principle of our democracy: Nobody Is Above The Law.
1. Connivance between P. Obama and J. Sotomayor and dereliction of duty
The President too will have to fight off calls for his resignation or impeachment. In addition, he will face the demand of the media and an outraged(83§§2-3) NATIONAL public that he release the secret FBI vetting report on J. Sotomayor, his first nominee to the Supreme Court. It can show whether he was informed also officially by it that she was engaging in the crime of concealing assets. Whether he learned through the FBI report or the articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Politico that she was suspected of concealing assets[107a], he covered it up and lied to the American public by vouching for her honesty. He had a personal interest in doing so: To cater to those petitioning for another woman and the first Latina for the Supreme Court and from whom he expected in exchange support for the passage of Obamacare.
Obamacare constitutes the President’s personal interest, his signature piece of legislation, the one that should establish his legacy. To ensure its passage, he nominated to the Supreme Court a dishonest person, Then-Judge Sotomayor, to shape the law of the land for the next 30 or so years during which she can still remain on the bench. But just as felons cannot serve as jurors, a judge who breaks the law shows hypocrisy and contempt for the law and cannot be expected to respect it enough to apply it fairly and impartially. Hence, he nominated her to the detriment of the people and judicial integrity. Such conduct warrants calls for his resignation or impeachment.
The issue here is not whether Obamacare should or should not have been adopted. Rather, it is that the President breached the trust of the American people and placed the advancement of his interest ahead of his duty to defend theirs, just as it was J. Sotomayor’s duty to uphold the law by abiding by it. Nor is it partisan politics that determines whether the people can exercise their right, as the source of all political power, to demand that its public servants behave with integrity.
2. Public outrage at the Federal Judiciary’s abuse of IT resources
The Federal Judiciary-NSA case can provoke a scandal more outrageous to more people than the scandal arisen through Edward Snowden’s revelations of NSA’s abuse of secret surveillance requests rubberstamped by the federal judges of the secret FISA court. The scandal would be deeper and more extensive because the judges of the Federal Judiciary, a national jurisdiction, wield power that affects not only the right of privacy, as the NSA scandal mainly does, but also every other right as well as the property, liberty, and life of everybody in this country. The scandal would only be aggravated if it were exposed that the President has covered for wrongdoing judges to avoid their retaliation17, i.e., their holding Obamacare and other actions of his unconstitutional, thus compounding the wrongdoing and allowing them to harm the people with impunity.
C. Plan of action to expose wrongdoing judges and lead to judicial reform
A plan of action can show how to proceed from exposing the unaccountability and riskless wrongdoing of the judges of the Federal Judiciary, the model for its state counterparts; to curbing them through legislated reform (158§§6-8) that mandates non-discretionary, specific method & result changes. The plan will subsequently find application to state judges and their judiciaries.
1. Presentations of the evidence and formation of an investigative team
The plan begins with presentations (Lsch:9) of the available evidence (jur:21§§A-B) of judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless wrongdoing. They will afford the opportunity to form out of the audiences a team of professionals (128§4) to investigate it further. So, the effort will be made to hold them at law, journalism, business, and IT schools as guest speaker events of classes, student societies, or the schools (Lsch:1). Holding them at student job fairs will offer in addition the presence of recruiters and even top officers of companies that can have an interest in joining the investigation. Likewise, they can be held at partisan conferences and meetings (ol:75). Winning the mid-term elections will give many politicians and their supporters a partisan interest in launching the investigation. Here applies the aphorism: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
2. Watergate-like generalized media investigation with national reach
The presentations and investigative team findings will outrage ever more people and can set off a Watergate-like (jur:4¶¶10-14) generalized media search for J. Sotomayor’s concealed assets (100§§3-4); and for a Judiciary-NSA link or an NSA-like abuse of IT resources (ol:19§D). Journalists covering the presentations can join the investigation in quest for a Pulitzer Prize, their portrayal in a blockbuster movie, and a name for themselves as those who caused a president or a justice to resign or be impeached (ol:3§6). Their editors can be motivated by increasing revenue from selling more advertisement addressed to a growing readership and viewership demanding ever more news on a scandal graver than current ones. Journalists can reach and outrage a NATIONAL public. Thus, they are indispensable for the presentations to have their full effect.
3. Official investigations by the authorities
An outraged national public can force Congress and the FBI to investigate officially the full extent of the judges’ wrongdoing and of the connivance between politicians (jur:77§§5-6) and the Federal Judiciary. The official investigators can exercise subpoena, search and seizure, contempt, and penal power. Hence, they can make even more outrageous findings of wrongdoing by federal judges and others doing wrong in coordination with them . Those findings will cause the national public to demand of politicians that they undertake judicial reform (158§§6-8), lest they be voted out of, or not into, office. There is precedent for this: The power of the Tea Party to force politicians to support its agenda or risk having their political careers terminated.
4. The pioneering of a field fostered by an academic and business venture
The novel news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting (122§§2-3) and reform advocacy will be pioneered at the presentations. It can be fostered through a multidisciplinary academic and business venture (119§1). Its members are likely to emerge from the audiences and be motivated by rendering service in the public interest and capitalizing on a business opportunity.
5. Creation of an institute and advocacy of judicial reform
The creation of the Institute of Judicial Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy (130§5) should be the mature and permanent form of the venture. It will advocate judicial reform based on the principles of accountability, transparency, discipline, and liability (ol:65§D). To be effective, it must include the public filing of complaints against judges, and the establishment of citizen boards of judicial accountability and discipline authorized to investigate them with subpoena, search and seizure, and contempt power, hold public hearings, and discipline judges, including by holding them liable to compensate the victims of their wrongdoing (160§8).
Emboldened by public outrage at the Federal Judiciary’s wrongdoing and demands for its reform, journalists will overcome the fear of retaliation and will investigate state judges too.
D. Working together to become We the People‘s Champions of Justice
The task now is to make the necessary contacts to produce (Lsch:12§C) the presentations. They will start this chain of events (ol:29) that can set off unprecedented, historic investigations and reform of the federal and state judiciaries. Those who courageously fight to protect the birthright of all Americans, to wit, ‘government, not of men, but by the rule of law', and enhance its benefits, such as freedom from abuse of power, secrecy, and arbitrariness, and effective enjoyment of Equal Justice Under Law, can be recognized by a grateful nation as its Champions of Justice.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at RepublicanLegion.com.
Become an insider!
Sign up for the free Freedom Outpost email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.