Subject: Justice Clifford W. Taylor
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 17:20:27 -0700
From: Doug Schafer <d_schafer@bigfoot.com>
To: "Fischer, Paul J. (MI JudTenCom)" <fischerp@jud.state.mi.us>FYI. I sent the below message to the Washington Commission on Judicial Conduct regarding Justice Sanders. Perhaps Justice Taylor truly had a hand in the brief, but Justice Sanders' broadcast remarks certainly suggested otherwise. Doug Schafer.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Judicial Integrity
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 14:35:34 -0700
From: Doug Schafer <d_schafer@bigfoot.com>
To: "Akana, Dave" <dakana@cjc.state.wa.us>,"Callner, Reiko"
<rcallner@cjc.state.wa.us>Please read and consider my message posted at:
http://lists.washlaw.edu/pipermail/legalethics/2002-April/000776.html [Webnote: reprinted below]It harms my confidence in the judiciary when one of its members publicly states that he authorized the use of his name and official position for an unidentified person to file an apparently fraudulent amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court purporting to be expressing the views and experiences of the judicial officer who, in fact, did nothing but consent to the use of his name.
Doug Schafer, idealistic lawyer in Tacoma.
http://www.DougSchafer.com
Posted on the LegalEthics listserv, hosted by Washburn University Law School. Subject: Re: [Legalethics] Judge as Amicus to Court?
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2002 21:53:43 -0800
From: Doug Schafer <d_schafer@bigfoot.com>
To: legalethics@lists.washlaw.eduRe: Ethics of ghost-writing an amicus brief for a nominal individual party?
We discussed last month some issues arising from the filing of amicus briefs in the pending U.S. Supreme Court's judicial free speech case (Republican Party of Minnesota v. Kelly). One such brief was filed by two state supreme court justices, Richard Sanders of the Washington Supreme Court and Clifford Taylor of the Michigan Supreme Court. It can be downloaded from the URL below.
The "Interest of Amici Curiae" statement beginning their brief states:
"As a past and potential future candidate for elective judicial office, and as a current state supreme court jurist, Justice Taylor brings to this Court a valuable perspective on the interests of both andidates and the judiciary."This week, Washington state's public televison network (like C-SPAN) is broadcasting a one-hour interview of Justice Sanders. In response to a question about his amicus participation in the pending U.S. Supreme Court case, he describes his own 1996-98 disciplinary case stemming from his brief
and
"Between his two elections Justice Sanders encountered political criticism and faced legal challenges for a speech regarding a controversial issue. He ultimately prevailed in defending his speech, both at the polls and in the courts. He thus brings to this Court a unique perspective on the interaction between judicial speech and judicial ethics in an elective system."
speech to a Pro-Life rally, then he says (I quote):"So I saw that the U.S. Supreme Court had accepted a similar case out of Minnesota. A law professor from, I believe, Chicago called me up and solicited my name to go on this brief. I said, "Sounds fine to me." And he wrote the brief and submitted it."The only lawyer named on the jurists' amici brief is their Counsel of Record, Erik S. Jaffee, of Erik S. Jaffee, P.C., in Washington, D.C.Q-1: Is there any requirement that individuals named as amici on a U.S. Supreme Court brief do anything more that simply authorize the use of their names?
Q-2: Is there any requirement that the sole or primary author of a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief be identified on it?
Q-3: Prof. Ron Rotunda (U. of Illinois Law School), since you are prominently named on the cover of the Petitioner's (Repub. Prty of MN) briefs as "Of Counsel," would you have any idea who the law professor was who solicited Justice Sanders' name and wrote "his" amicus brief?
Posted on the Internet (TVW.org) is the Justice Sanders interview audio file (listen with Real Player free software @ real.com), and you can fast-forward directly to the 40-minute point where he says the above-quoted remarks, at: http://198.239.32.162/ramgen/200204/2002040054.ra
The so-called "State Supreme Court Justices Amicus Brief" is at:
http://supreme.usatoday.findlaw.com/supreme_court/briefs/01-521/01-521.mer.ami.justices.pdfDoug Schafer, idealistic solo lawyer in Tacoma, Washington.
http://www.DougSchafer.com