FOR FREE YUGIOH CARDS, CLICK THE PAGE ON THE RIGHT!!! No scams, viruses, or malware. Click the black titles of the posts if you would like to see the entire post.
One of my episodes last week on the Tom Woods Show covered a topic that other podcasts are unfortunately neglecting, but which we'd better start talking about pretty darn fast.
The Bolshevik Revolution ushered in a transformation of the Russian legal system along with it: in Lenin's Russia a judge didn't need to master what was in all those dusty old law books. It was sufficient that he held a proper "revolutionary consciousness," which he could apply to each case separately.
Well, the case of John Eastman shows that we may not be as far from that outcome in our own society as we think.
But first, a key historical episode: in 1770, most Boston lawyers refused to represent Captain Thomas Preston and his soldiers, who were charged with killing five colonists. John Adams, a patriot and lawyer, took the case, believing that a fair trial required competent counsel.
Through methodical presentation of evidence, Adams secured acquittals for Preston and six soldiers, with two convicted only of manslaughter. He later called this "one of the best Pieces of Service I ever rendered my Country." He went on to help draft the Declaration of Independence, serve as vice president, and become the second U.S. President. Today, the American Bar Association still mandates that lawyers represent clients with "commitment and dedication" and "zeal in advocacy."
John Eastman has received the opposite treatment for providing legal advice to an unpopular client, namely Donald Trump. A prominent conservative lawyer, former Chapman University law professor and dean, clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas, and appellate litigator, Eastman advised Trump on the mechanics of electoral vote counting under the 12th Amendment and the Electoral Count Act of 1887.
He suggested Vice President Mike Pence could defer counting disputed electoral votes from swing states pending further review -- a theory that had parallels in prior Democratic objections in 2002, 2005, and 2017, which faced no similar backlash. Pence ultimately proceeded with certification on January 6, 2021, rendering the issue moot.
Nevertheless, Eastman was forced to retire from Chapman, lost a visiting professorship, was indicted in Georgia alongside Trump, subpoenaed by Congress, and disbarred in California following a record 35-day hearing before a Democrat-donor judge. The process cost him over $750,000 personally, with total defense costs potentially reaching $3-3.5 million.
The California State Bar’s decision found grounds for disbarment despite Eastman not having engaged in fraud, lying, or moral turpitude, the standard reasons for that punishment. Eastman's advice, whether you agreed with it or not, clearly fell within the good-faith, zealous advocacy we are supposed to expect from lawyers, in an area of law marked by textual ambiguity and limited precedent.
As important as the Eastman case is in itself, and there's plenty more to say about it, it is even more important in terms of what it portends for the future.
As the law schools and thus the legal profession drift farther to the left (and the poll numbers don't lie on this), we come closer and closer to a system like the Bolshevik one, in which judges fish around for legal arguments to justify outcomes they've decided in advance.
This is why it was so revealing to hear "progressives" say, upon the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that what made her great was that "she fought for what she believed in." Being a Supreme Court justice has nothing to do with fighting for what you believe in.
My guest for this episode was Mark Pulliam, a legal scholar I've actually sparred with in the past (the two of us had a civil debate -- remember those? -- in print last year), but with whom I am in firm agreement on this critically important issue.
If you're not already subscribed to the Tom Woods Show (I find that impossible to believe!), I hope you can find the time to listen:
(1) If you are thinking of using the K-12 Ron Paul Curriculum for the coming year, I offer $160 in free bonuses (including an autographed book, a special mini-course for middle schoolers on American liberty, and more), but to get those bonuses you have to join through my link and then forward your receipt to bonuses@tomwoods.com. My link is:
(2)On my email list for entrepreneurs we've been talking about a recurring income model that (unlike the one I myself love and practice) does not involve email lists, affiliate marketing, social media content, building an audience, etc. Nobody even has to know who the heck you are. We're presenting it this afternoon if you'd like to attend live:
No comments:
Post a Comment