Federal Judge in Texas Demands Justice Dept. Lawyers Take Ethics Class.

[elleng]

'A federal judge in Texas on Thursday excoriated the Justice Department, demanding ethics classes for the department’s lawyers and ordering other sanctions for those who argued the case involving President Obama’s immigration executive actions.

He also ordered the government to produce a list of about 100,000 immigrants who entered illegally and who are participating in a government program that protects them from deportation.

In a blistering order, Judge Andrew S. Hanen of Federal District Court in Brownsville accused the Justice Department lawyers of lying to him during arguments in the case, and he barred them from appearing in his courtroom.

He also demanded that Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch provide a “comprehensive plan” within 60 days describing how she will prevent unethical conduct in the future, as well as making sure the department’s Office of Professional Responsibility effectively prevents misconduct among its lawyers.

He also said that any Justice Department lawyer who wants to appear in a state or federal court in any of the 26 states who filed suit to block Mr. Obama’s executive actions should be required to take an annual three-hour ethics course for the next five years.

“Clearly, there seems to be a lack of knowledge about or adherence to the duties of professional responsibility in the halls of the Justice Department,” Judge Hanen wrote in the 28-page order. . .

The judge’s rare, public condemnation of government lawyers was the result of the Obama administration’s decision to move ahead with carrying out part of the president’s immigration plan even after the judge issued a temporary hold on the actions in February 2015.

For several months after that order, thousands of young, illegal immigrants were given a three-year renewal of a program that grants them a temporary right to live and work in the United States legally. Under the judge’s order, the administration should have given only those immigrants the two-year extension available before the president’s executive actions.

Justice Department lawyers later said the administration had made a mistake and reversed the three-year extensions for about 100,000 people, but Judge Hanen accused the lawyers of purposely trying to mislead his court.'>>>

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/us/andrew-hanen-immigration-texas-court.html?

[scscholar]

1. A judge in Texas talking about ethics

That's a good one.

[branford]

2. The problem this time is the DOJ, not Texas.

Judge Hanen is a federal judge, confirmed 97-0 by the Senate, and has been serving on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas for 14 years. Before United States v. Texas, I don't believe he was ever the subject of any controversy.

Unfortunately, there are a number of Justice Department attorneys who've demonstrated serious ethical lapses or worse in recent years under both Republican and Democratic administrations, and if you read the article, you would have noticed that the lawyers actually admitted seriously violating the injunction (among many other problems).

Regardless of how one may feel about his DAPA injunction (which was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals), as an attorney, I can assure you that the Justice Department lawyers did not positively distinguish themselves in this case, and its entirely possible they knowingly and willingly colluded with the White House and DOJ to ignore the injunction.

[Rex]

4. No shit! I wonder how he will feel when the DoJ treats him like a RWing idiot.

No doubt they will just ignore small fry.

[Dr. Strange]

3. I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often.

I wonder if we'll see cops being sentenced to the same thing some day?

[Amishman]

5. we can only hope

and i'll second others comments to read the article before passing judgement. It sounds like the DoJ did violate the court orders. Right or wrong, we are supposed to be a nation of laws and the government should be bound by its own rules.

[elleng]

6. Right.