Monday, May 23, 2016

The US Justice Department Lies - and is caught by a Federal Judge. Guarding people from the guardians.

From  a recent court finding:

"To say that the Government acted contrary to its multiple assurances to this Court is, at best, an understatement. The Government knowingly acted contrary to its representations to this Court on over 100,000 occasions.
11
This Court finds that the misrepresentations detailed above: (1) were false; (2) were made in bad faith; and (3) misled both the Court and the Plaintiff States."

Furthermore,

"Now, however, having studied the Government’s filings in this case, its admissions make one conclusion indisputably clear: the
Justice Department lawyers knew the true facts and misrepresented
those facts to the citizens of the 26 Plaintiff States, their lawyers and this Court on multiple occasions.

       The Government’s Explanation

The Government claims that the reason its lawyers were not candid with the Court was that they either “lost focus on the fact” or that somehow “the fact receded in memory or awareness.”


I wonder if any one can use this excuse with the government? 


For the full details of the lies, misrepresentations and worse, see the ruling cited below:


 http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/texas_order_20160519.pdf


And here is the start of the court's remedy:


"hereby orders 

that any attorney employed at the Justice Department in Washington,
D.C. who appears, or seeks to appear, in a court (state or federal) in any of the 26 Plaintiff States annually attend a legal ethics course.
15
It shall be taught by at least one recognized ethics expert who is
unaffiliated with the Justice Department. At a minimum, this course (or courses) shall total at least three hours of ethics training per year.
The subject matter shall include a discussion of the ethical codes of
conduct (which will include candor to the court and truthfulness to third parties) applicable in that jurisdiction."


For the rest of the order see the above citations.


Here are some news reports and analysis of this case from across the political spectrum:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/judge-andrew-hanen-doj-order_us_573e3504e4b00e09e89e8f9f



http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-miscarriage-of-justice-department-1463953209

What can we learn from this, what can we clarify from this?