Skip to main content

A bitter pill I'm proud to swallow.

Just for clarification, my license has not been suspended ... yet. If it is suspended, I will likely never be able to have it reinstated because I will never agree that it isn't my job, as an attorney and a US citizen, to call out a judge who ignores the law; who abuses her authority and who denies due process to litigants and that it isn't my sworn duty to call attention to those transgressions to the public, which is the last and only remaining check on judicial authority.
This Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board disagrees with me and now the Louisiana Supreme Court will ultimately decide, but it's obvious from the LADB's recommendation that it and I have completely different notions of what is honorable and ethical and what an attorney's duty is to the profession and who it serves.
The thing I keep coming back to is, why do I care? Why even fight? If You, the People, don't care, why should I? This country is, on paper anyway, a democracy and I believe in the democratic process. Clearly, my idea of what it means to be honorable and to serve my clients is not the majority view within the profession, if the LADB's opinion is representative. If this is the system you all want, then the democratic process says you can have it.
It's not like losing my license at this point is going to be some huge financial blow. I never made enough money to live on as an attorney because I did so much pro bono work. I just wanted to help people. If I have to choose between helping people and keeping my license then the license is meaningless.
Do I sound bitter? I am, a little, but not because of my license, or the accusations, or even the fight itself. I'm proud of my conduct. I'm proud of the fight. Whatever the outcome, I will be no less proud of what I've done because in doing it, I was true to the oath I took, to uphold the law and to advocate for justice for my clients.
I've lost so much respect for the Bar that my license just looks like blackmail to me anymore. I'm ashamed of the profession and what the LADB has done in its name, and what it has allowed to go on in its name, in plain view, while it turns a blind eye. I am embarrassed to tell people I'm an attorney because the LADB's opinion legitimizes so much of what people despise about attorneys and judges. To keep that license, according to the LADB, I have to become what I despise. That's not any kind of choice at all, and I have no problems choosing to keep my convictions. I'm proud, not bitter, to make that choice.
I'm bitter because the justice system that I believe in - the one that actually involves justice - is about to get ground under the heel of the status quo that you all seem to never stop complaining about - and none of you can be bothered to care, though no doubt, it won't stop any of you from complaining incessantly about how broken it is.
I am besieged daily by requests to sign petitions and to protest any number of goings-on in this parish and beyond, from fracking to term limits to saving the whales, wild horses, illegal immigrants, legal immigrants - I could go on all day - and am constantly sought out by people who want the benefit of my legal training - for free - which I still give whenever I can.
As important as all of those things are, no one, other than me and those closest to me, seem even a little bit worried about what it means if the Louisiana Supreme Court sees fit to take my license. No one seems outraged by the LADB's recommendations, analysis, or blatant misrepresentation of the facts which support their conclusions and recommendations. No one is even a little bit concerned about the inherent validation by the LADB of this legal system that you all constantly complain about.
That makes me bitter. Not a pretty truth, but truth nonetheless.
At this point, keep my license, lose my license, personally, it hardly seems to matter. It's just a piece of paper and with it or without it, I'm the same person with the same convictions. But if the Supreme Court agrees that what I did in representing my client is sanctionable, then you're damn right it matters to the legal system.

Comments

  1. Janine, I understand / empathize where all your your thoughts and emotions were coming from during your fight for your license.

    I read a Bloomberg article I the bar And supreme court decision...

    the embellishments and legal reaches that were made to describe your social bogging as ex-parte communications are so twisted and tortured that the defy logic...

    the court called this novel... it wasn't.. it was HE.

    now what's scary is it is law...

    anyway that is how and why the legal system and judges retaliate against reform agents... they discredit ahs destroy those who criticize... and unwittingly they destroy safeguards for others in the future...

    they make it easier for worse injustices to become law.

    and they scare people away from those courageous reform agents

    ReplyDelete
  2. Janine, I understand / empathize where all your your thoughts and emotions were coming from during your fight for your license.

    I read a Bloomberg article I the bar And supreme court decision...

    the embellishments and legal reaches that were made to describe your social bogging as ex-parte communications are so twisted and tortured that the defy logic...

    the court called this novel... it wasn't.. it was HE.

    now what's scary is it is law...

    anyway that is how and why the legal system and judges retaliate against reform agents... they discredit ahs destroy those who criticize... and unwittingly they destroy safeguards for others in the future...

    they make it easier for worse injustices to become law.

    and they scare people away from those courageous reform agents

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's NOT a Rhetorical Question

P arents often ask me, in one form or another, why our family court system is so broken.  How can the judges, attorneys, therapists, police officers, etc., who are supposed to protect children fail so miserably?  How can “they” deny due process, violate the First Amendment, ignore the rule of law, and inflict so much pain and suffering on families in the name of justice and get away with it, every day, right here, in the greatest country on earth? All over the world, people suffer this and worse, I'm sorry to say. Look at Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, the Sudan, Nigeria, to name just a few.  “Injustice” doesn’t begin to capture the reality of those places.  You think because you’re Americans and you live in the "greatest country on earth" that you are guaranteed "liberty and justice."  You entrust your freedoms to others; put yellow-ribbon stickers on your cars; share warm and fuzzy memes on Facebook; choose your elected officials based on a two-second

Roadmap to Disbarment

It should be obvious by now that if someone is determined NOT to know the truth, then it doesn’t matter how much truth is put in front of her or him, the truth will be ignored.  But for anyone interested in facts underlying my journey to disbarment, here they are. The underlying events dealt with allegations of abuse of two small children which gave rise to a custody case in Mississippi, an intra-family adoption case in Louisiana, and a petition seeking emergency relief, also filed in Louisiana. On July 20, 2011, Chancellor Deborah Gambrell, the Mississippi judge presiding over the custody case in Mississippi, issued  an illegal order  affecting custody and visitation of the children. The order was issued without prior notice to mom, and it was done in the judge's chambers so there was no record of what was said. Those two factors alone make is absolutely null, according to the U.S. Constitution and Mississippi law. The order allowed dad to have supervised (by his mother w

Home of the brave?

The author People - mostly people who call themselves republicans - keep asking, "what's wrong with a 'temporary' ban to make sure people coming here aren't terrorists?" Here's my two biggest complaints: 1) There is no evidence that this "temporary" ban (indefinite for Syrian refugees) is based on any imminent threat from those people who have already been subjected to extensive vetting (over two years) and are now cleared to come here but for Trump's ban; and 2) even if the current vet ting process could be better, and keep people here in the US "safer" (from foreign-born terrorists), we are already infinitely safer than so many of the people coming here, and certainly all of the refugees who are fleeing, literally, unimaginable horror, at least if you've lived here you entire life. Is there a risk that a "bad" person will slip past all of the extensive screening we already have in place? Sure - there is abs