from DumpMicheleBachmann blog:
New mystery: Bachmann not authorized to practice law? Our latest mystery here at Dump Bachmann concerns whether or not Congresswoman Bachmann is currently authorized to practice law here in Minnesota.
I was checking in to read the "Daily Digest" of Minnesota politics at MPR's Polinaut website (and everyone should check in regularly to read that.) There I found the following claim in their regular "Daily Digest" post:
"GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann's law license is also not valid."Interesting, right? But when you follow the link that Polinaut gives in support of the claim, you are taken to a Star Tribune website that describes DFL candidate Ashwin Madia's *renewal* of *his* law license. The only reference to Bachmann's law license is a featured comment by an unidentified author. The author of this comment claims that Bachmann is no longer authorized to practice law in Minnesota, and gives the following link in support of that claim:
http://www.mncourts.gov/lprb/lawyersearchdetails.aspx?mars=0179863If you follow that link, you see this:
MINNESOTA LAWYER SEARCH:
LAWYER PUBLIC DISCIPLINE RECORD
Minnesota Lawyer Record of Public Discipline and/or Disability Information:
Lawyer License No.: 0179863
Full Licensed Name: MICHELE MARIE BACHMANN
City, State: STILLWATER, MN
Date Admitted to
Minnesota Bar: 12/19/1986
Authorized to Practice: NOT AUTHORIZED
Reason(s): CLE: RESTRICTED-VOLUNTARY
No Public Discipline on Record.
Home | New SearchThe proprietor of the website that posted this information(www.mncourts.gov) is the Minnesota Judicial Branch.
Also on the Minnesota Judicial Branch's website is the Minnesota Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board and Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility. They are "responsible for oversight and administration of the Minnesota lawyer discipline system." Their site allows the public to search for lawyers licensed to practice in Minnesota to determine whether they have been publicly disciplined. All you have to do is enter the lawyer's name.
So I put in Michele Bachmann's name, and I see that "no, she has not been disciplined"--but yes, it is true that she is not authorized to practice law in Minnesota. Then I click on her name, to learn why she is not authorized to practice law in Minnesota: and I get the information that I reproduced above.
The part of that information that seems important to me is this:
Authorized to Practice: NOT AUTHORIZED
Reason(s): CLE: RESTRICTED-VOLUNTARY
The acronym CLE stands for "Continuing Legal Education." When I was in law--a looong time ago-- the states required that attorneys attend yearly seminars on law ("continuing legal education") to keep their authorization to practice law in good standing. It's a pain in the ass for many lawyers (in terms of scheduling and time off from work) but you had to do it. And failure to do so could result in suspension. It may be that the reason that Michele is not "authorized to practice" is that she has failed to fulfill her "continuing legal education" requirement. I don't know for sure that is the reason that the Minnesota Judicial Branch is telling people that she's not authorized to practice; that that is what the "CLE: RESTRICTED-VOLUNTARY" means.
But it's worth a phone call from either Michele or me to find out.
Next mystery: who sent that comment in to the Star Tribune, alleging that Michele is not authorized to practice law in Minnesota? Was it someone from Dump Bachmann? Was it some disgruntled employee or colleague? The comment wasn't signed.
http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2008/08/new-mystery-bachmanns-license-to.html