« A great deal! | Main | Michigan ruling on "use" of deadly force »
Charges of unlicensed practice of law over Supreme Court brief
This is inspired by Fyooz's comment on the previous post, and merits its own. The brief I mentioned, threatening to pack the Supreme Court if it didn't rule against the 2A, was filed by Sen. Whitehouse of Rhode Island. Judicial Watch has discovered that his license to practice law is "inactive," meaning he's not supposed to file pleadings or other be practicing law. It's filed a complaint with the Rhode Island bar, Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee.
Why'd he go "inactive"? It has lower dues and you don't have to take Continuing Legal Education, around 15 hours of classes per year. But while you're skipping the classes, you aren't supposed to be filing things anywhere, let alone in the Supreme Court!
4 Comments | Leave a comment
But then are not these laws just like those for interior decorators in SC or hairdressers in TN? Why should anyone need a license to practice law? Because the good old boys who set things up said so. No further reason. As has been stated even the Constitution doesn't guarantee one a lawyer. It guarantees one counsel who can be anyone, not necessarily an attorney. All professions have this BS.
Ideally, I tend to agree with FWB. The kicker is that Whitehouse has completely bought into the system. A JD degree and a sitting Senator, with the associated public footprint, seeking lots of publicity. Does he think no one will notice this, or is it that the rules don't apply to someone as special as him? The attitudes of our entitled aristocracy are on display.
Wonder if someone will file a motion to strike the brief.
...Shyster. And a chiseling one at that. Oughta bitch him to the Senate too. Another Rhode Island Red gets broasted.