Pat Buchanan: The Donald & The La Raza Judge

[markomalley]

Trump doesn't seem to think it's a big deal:
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,210588.msg914960.html#msg914960
Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has been openly condemning U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel on the campaign trail for, among other things, his alleged affiliation with the National Council of La Raza (NCLR). But despite Trump's political posturing, several recipients of La Raza Congressional and Capital Awards have been direct beneficiaries of Donald Trump's money.

More Specifically: I don't see how this biases the judge against Trump U. Are you suggesting the judges have to recuse themselves, in cases not rooted in politics, from judgments against any organization or person they don't agree with politically?

If they judge was a firm supporter of building a wall with a big beautiful door in it, should he recuse himself because he might be biased in favor of Trump?

Judges need to be careful of actual or perceived conflicts of interest. As do many other government people (such as acquisition personnel).

For example, it would be reasonable to bring up a potential conflict of interest if a judge ruling on a Second Amendment case was a lifetime member of NRA or "Mothers Against Gun Violence"

Criticisms related to these conflicts of interest (real or perceived) are reasonable and to be expected. Most ethical people would recuse themselves once a potential conflict is recognized...

Had Trump criticized Curiel's membership in various organizations, that would be reasonable...whether the conflicts generated a potential for a conflict of interest.

BUT TRUMP DIDN'T CRITICIZE CURIEL'S MEMBERSHIPS. He criticized Curiel's ethnicity. And then he doubled down on it. And then he directed his surrogates to pick up the attack. And that fact, in of itself, make his actions racist rather than reasonable.

[Ghost Bear]

I don't see what your asking. How can one simply call themselves a "Social Conservative" That's only one part of an ideology.

People who consider themselves formost Social Conservatives certainly do exist. It's called the Religious Right. I was just saying that those people also have views on other issues. I think the Religious Right is a category of Conservatism itself.

OK, so, which is your final answer?

[PaleoConPrep]

OK, so, which is your final answer?

The last quote. I wasn't sure what you were asking at first.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

Judges need to be careful of actual or perceived conflicts of interest. As do many other government people (such as acquisition personnel).

For example, it would be reasonable to bring up a potential conflict of interest if a judge ruling on a Second Amendment case was a lifetime member of NRA or "Mothers Against Gun Violence"

Criticisms related to these conflicts of interest (real or perceived) are reasonable and to be expected. Most ethical people would recuse themselves once a potential conflict is recognized...

Had Trump criticized Curiel's membership in various organizations, that would be reasonable...whether the conflicts generated a potential for a conflict of interest.

BUT TRUMP DIDN'T CRITICIZE CURIEL'S MEMBERSHIPS. He criticized Curiel's ethnicity. And then he doubled down on it. And then he directed his surrogates to pick up the attack. And that fact, in of itself, make his actions racist rather than reasonable.

As Trump said it, he seems to think he will never get a fair hearing from a judge of the wrong ethnicity. In a typical liberal move Trump is playing the race card and making this a political football. The case didn't have to do with politics.

[txradioguy]

You're just another HeoCon fraud. The demographics you speak of won't matter. If Trump loses, at least one or two states WILL secede.  The people in Red states will not tolerate 8 years of Queen Hillary. I'd like to see the Feds try and stop them. I'll likely be going to college in Idaho, so I'll be away from the mess for a while. If I'm wrong and nothing changes, I'll buy a nice big house in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho ( a perfect small town for me) and live happily ever after. I might even run for Congress representing Idaho.( that's one stats where I'd have a shot with my views)

Would you like to make some kind of wager on that?

[Suppressed]

"La Raza Layers Association"?

Is that for poultry farmers?

[Suppressed]

Two more graphics appropriate to the thread:

Serious question... do you think Trump supporters are just too stupid to tell the difference between the two organizations that share part of their names, or are they intentionally trying to confuse the issue to try to score points?  I honestly can't tell!


Edited to add: Not sure what your position is...perhaps you're a Trump supporter.  I'm not trying to direct any insult at you or anyone else, but I'm just trying to understand how something that's been explained and is so obvious with a Google search is being ignored by so many Trump supporters I see.

[PaleoConPrep]

Would you like to make some kind of wager on that?

Let's see how things look on November 1, and then we can talk.

[ExFreeper]

While reading the Senate Judiciary Questionnaire, I noted that Judge Curiel is in fact a life member of the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA).  It would appear that HNBA in July 2015 issued a Press Release against Trump.  In my view, yes, Judge Curiel should recuse himself, however this not give Trump the right to disparage him solely based on his heritage.

THE HISPANIC NATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION REJECTS TRUMP'S RACIST ASSERTIONS
 
Washington, DC –­­­­ The Hispanic National Bar Association represents the interests of nearly 54 million Hispanics/Latinos in the United States, which is approximately 17% of the U.S. population. By his recent derogatory remarks about Mexican immigrants, Donald Trump’s disrespect of such a large segment of the population of America is not only unbelievable, but outright wrong.  His comment that Mexico only sends rapists and criminals to the United States reveals a racist nature that cannot and will not go unnoticed by the Hispanic National Bar Association nor the Latino community. 

Those who seek our highest public office should attempt to engage all Americans, not divide us. His comments are clearly divisive and racist and do nothing to promote equality and justice for all.  Trump’s statements reveal a bias that all Americans should reject and respond to accordingly.  We cannot stand silent and allow Trump to promote such racist and discriminatory behavior. This is the time for all Americans to take a stand against his insensitive, offensive and untrue statements.

The HNBA calls for a boycott of all of Trump business ventures, including golf courses, hotels, and restaurants.  We salute NBC/Universal, Univision and Macy’s for ending their association with Trump, and we join them in standing up against bigotry and racist rhetoric. Other businesses and corporations should follow the lead of NBC/Universal, Univision and Macy’s and take similar actions against Donald Trump’s business interests.  We can and will make a difference.


Cynthia D. Mares
HNBA National President

http://us4.campaign-archive2.com/?u=df9a27c10b6d6ba38ba001440&id=f8a4a02241&e=cd8fc1ccd9

Screen Image captured for historical purposes.

[Suppressed]

While reading the Senate Judiciary Questionnaire, I noted that Judge Curiel is in fact a life member of the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA).  It would appear that HNBA in July 2015 issued a Press Release against Trump.  In my view, yes, Judge Curiel should recuse himself, however this not give Trump the right to disparage him solely based on his heritage.

I'm a member of scientific organizations that have issued statements with which I don't agree.  Does that make me biased?

[HoustonSam]

Judge Curiel is in fact a life member of the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA).  It would appear that  in July 2015 issued a Press Release against Trump.  In my view, yes, Judge Curiel should recuse himself,

Race is not an issue in the case before Judge Curiel.  The legal question is one of fraud.  While I'm not a lawyer, I don't think the justice system can reasonably operate if judges are expected to have no prior opinions on anything related to the parties in a suit.  We can, and should, expect judges to have no prior opinions on the facts of the case before them.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

What happened?  Did Donnie suddenly wake up last week and discover the judge was really of Hispanic background?  What happened?  Was the judge wearing whiteface up until then and speaking with a fine Irish accent?

https://politicalwire.com/2016/06/01/clinton-camp-hits-trump-as-a-con-man/
What happened was Clinton stumbled upon how to hurt Trump.  Trump was desperate to change the narrative from Trump U is a con job to Trump is a racist.  Being a racist doesn't hurt Trump with his skinhead followers, and even non-racists are inclined to excuse Trump because they believe the left uses the race card too often.  This was a calculated move, not a verbal blunder, as evidenced by Trumps conference call yesterday.

Trump gave marching orders to his surrogates.  Get Trump U off the headlines at all costs.

[Ghost Bear]

The last quote. I wasn't sure what you were asking at first.

Thank you for clarifying.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

And give it to who? Cuck  Cruz?

I'm surprised it has taken so long to see the neo-nazi favorite slur "Cuck" to show up here. 

[ExFreeper]

I'm a member of scientific organizations that have issued statements with which I don't agree.  Does that make me biased?

Membership in a scientific organization is different than a Judge as there is a higher standard.  Do you decide cases involving public individuals or businesses in which your opinion and decision will have final say.  Can the Judge honestly claim that he does not have a "conflict of interest" and would be impartial in this case?

28 U.S. Code § 453 - Oaths of justices and judges

Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)

28 U.S. Code § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:

(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;

(2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;

(3) Where he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy;

(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:

(i) Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;

(ii) Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;

(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(iv) Is to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.

(c) A judge should inform himself about his personal and fiduciary financial interests, and make a reasonable effort to inform himself about the personal financial interests of his spouse and minor children residing in his household.

(d) For the purposes of this section the following words or phrases shall have the meaning indicated:

(1) “proceeding” includes pretrial, trial, appellate review, or other stages of litigation;

(2) the degree of relationship is calculated according to the civil law system;

(3) “fiduciary” includes such relationships as executor, administrator, trustee, and guardian;

(4) “financial interest” means ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however small, or a relationship as director, adviser, or other active participant in the affairs of a party, except that:

(i) Ownership in a mutual or common investment fund that holds securities is not a “financial interest” in such securities unless the judge participates in the management of the fund;

(ii) An office in an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization is not a “financial interest” in securities held by the organization;

(iii) The proprietary interest of a policyholder in a mutual insurance company, of a depositor in a mutual savings association, or a similar proprietary interest, is a “financial interest” in the organization only if the outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value of the interest;

(iv) Ownership of government securities is a “financial interest” in the issuer only if the outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value of the securities.

(e) No justice, judge, or magistrate judge shall accept from the parties to the proceeding a waiver of any ground for disqualification enumerated in subsection (b). Where the ground for disqualification arises only under subsection (a), waiver may be accepted provided it is preceded by a full disclosure on the record of the basis for disqualification.

(f) Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this section, if any justice, judge, magistrate judge, or bankruptcy judge to whom a matter has been assigned would be disqualified, after substantial judicial time has been devoted to the matter, because of the appearance or discovery, after the matter was assigned to him or her, that he or she individually or as a fiduciary, or his or her spouse or minor child residing in his or her household, has a financial interest in a party (other than an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome), disqualification is not required if the justice, judge, magistrate judge, bankruptcy judge, spouse or minor child, as the case may be, divests himself or herself of the interest that provides the grounds for the disqualification.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 908; Pub. L. 93–512, § 1, Dec. 5, 1974, 88 Stat. 1609; Pub. L. 95–598, title II, § 214(a), (b), Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2661; Pub. L. 100–702, title X, § 1007, Nov. 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 4667; Pub. L. 101–650, title III, § 321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.)

[Ghost Bear]

Serious question... do you think Trump supporters are just too stupid to tell the difference between the two organizations that share part of their names, or are they intentionally trying to confuse the issue to try to score points?  I honestly can't tell!


Edited to add: Not sure what your position is...perhaps you're a Trump supporter.  I'm not trying to direct any insult at you or anyone else, but I'm just trying to understand how something that's been explained and is so obvious with a Google search is being ignored by so many Trump supporters I see.

I think it's a mix of both, although I wouldn't use the word "stupid", I would instead say, "ill-informed". I think some know that they are different organizations but are deliberately obscuring that in an attempt to score points for Mr. Trump. But a discussion that I heard on a local radio show this morning indicates that many people don't realize that they are two different organizations, and assume that the organization the judge belongs to is the La Raza, or in some way affiliated with the more famous organization.

[Jazzhead]

Is the judge from Indiana a Mexican or was Trump lying about him?

He's a natural born American citizen.   He's eligible to be President, and he'd be a far less racist one than Donald Trump. 

[Formerly Once-Ler]

You guys call anyone who isn't a Zionist an Anti-Semite.  An Anti-Semite is someone who hates Jews because their Jewish. Buchanan simply points out the fact that there is a very strong Jewish lobby in this country, trying to keep us in the Middle East. Pat believes ( as I do) that Israel is its own nation, and must take care of itself. That's not Anti-Semitism. Sorry you wacky Zionists, but I will NEVER put  Israeli interests before those of America. Israel isn't special. It's just like any other nation. They have a strong military. If they can't defend themselves, that's too bad.  Russell Kirk agreed. Is Kirk an Anti-Semite too?

Zionist?  WTF?  Did you come straight here from stormfront?

[txradioguy]

Zionist?  WTF?  Did you come straight here from stormfront?

@Once-Ler whew!  Glad to see I wasn't the only one thinking that.

[markomalley]

As Trump said it, he seems to think he will never get a fair hearing from a judge of the wrong ethnicity. In a typical liberal move Trump is playing the race card and making this a political football. The case didn't have to do with politics.

And this is the point. He questioned ethnicity, not association.

[ExFreeper]

Race is not an issue in the case before Judge Curiel.  The legal question is one of fraud.  While I'm not a lawyer, I don't think the justice system can reasonably operate if judges are expected to have no prior opinions on anything related to the parties in a suit.  We can, and should, expect judges to have no prior opinions on the facts of the case before them.

Your points are valid however there are guidelines for such activities.  If I was representing Trump, I recommend and ask the Judge to remove himself as I would believe this action would be in my client's best interest based on my understanding of the case so far.  Now with this said, this should be done in a private and confidential manner and not in the public.

A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities

(A) Respect for Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

(B) Outside Influence. A judge should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment. A judge should neither lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. A judge should not testify voluntarily as a character witness.

(C) Nondiscriminatory Membership. A judge should not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin.

Canon 2A. An appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances disclosed by a reasonable inquiry, would conclude that the judge’s honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge is impaired. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the prohibition is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of this Code.

'snip'

...A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities that are Consistent with the Obligations of Judicial Office

A judge may engage in extrajudicial activities, including law-related pursuits and civic, charitable, educational, religious, social, financial, fiduciary, and governmental activities, and may speak, write, lecture, and teach on both law-related and nonlegal subjects. However, a judge should not participate in extrajudicial activities that detract from the dignity of the judge’s office, interfere with the performance of the judge’s official duties, reflect adversely on the judge’s impartiality, lead to frequent disqualification, or violate the limitations set forth below.

(A) Law-related Activities.

(1) Speaking, Writing, and Teaching. A judge may speak, write, lecture, teach, and participate in other activities concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice

(2) Consultation. A judge may consult with or appear at a public hearing before an executive or legislative body or official:

(a)on matters concerning the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice;

(b)to the extent that it would generally be perceived that a judge’s judicial experience provides special expertise in the area; or

(c)when the judge is acting pro se in a matter involving the judge or the judge’s interest.

(3) Organizations. A judge may participate in and serve as a member, officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of a nonprofit organization devoted to the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice and may assist such an organization in the management and investment of funds. A judge may make recommendations to public and private fund-granting agencies about projects and programs concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice.

(4) Arbitration and Mediation. A judge should not act as an arbitrator or mediator or otherwise perform judicial functions apart from the judge’s official duties unless expressly authorized by law.

(5) Practice of Law. A judge should not practice law and should not serve as a family member’s lawyer in any forum. A judge may, however, act pro se and may, without compensation, give legal advice to and draft or review documents for a member of the judge’s family.

(B) Civic and Charitable Activities. A judge may participate in and serve as an officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of a nonprofit civic, charitable, educational, religious, or social organization, subject to the following limitations:

(1) A judge should not serve if it is likely that the organization will either be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge or be regularly engaged in adversary proceedings in any court.

(2) A judge should not give investment advice to such an organization but may serve on its board of directors or trustees even though it has the responsibility for approving investment decisions.

(C) Fund Raising. A judge may assist nonprofit law-related, civic, charitable, educational, religious, or social organizations in planning fund-raising activities and may be listed as an officer, director, or trustee. A judge may solicit funds for such an organization from judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority and from members of the judge’s family. Otherwise, a judge should not personally participate in fund-raising activities, solicit funds for any organization, or use or permit the use of the prestige of judicial office for that purpose. A judge should not personally participate in membership solicitation if the solicitation might reasonably be perceived as coercive or is essentially a fund-raising mechanism.

(D) Financial Activities.

(1) A judge may hold and manage investments, including real estate, and engage in other remunerative activity, but should refrain from financial and business dealings that exploit the judicial position or involve the judge in frequent transactions or continuing business relationships with lawyers or other persons likely to come before the court on which the judge serves.

(2) A judge may serve as an officer, director, active partner, manager, advisor, or employee of a business only if the business is closely held and controlled by members of the judge’s family. For this purpose, “members of the judge’s family” means persons related to the judge or the judge’s spouse within the third degree of relationship as defined in Canon 3C(3)(a), any other relative with whom the judge or the judge’s spouse maintains a close familial relationship, and the spouse of any of the foregoing.

(3) As soon as the judge can do so without serious financial detriment, the judge should divest investments and other financial interests that might require frequent disqualification.

(4) A judge should comply with the restrictions on acceptance of gifts and the prohibition on solicitation of gifts set forth in the Judicial Conference Gift Regulations. A judge should endeavor to prevent any member of the judge’s family residing in the household from soliciting or accepting a gift except to the extent that a judge would be permitted to do so by the Judicial Conference Gift Regulations. A “member of the judge’s family” means any relative of a judge by blood, adoption, or marriage, or any person treated by a judge as a member of the judge’s family.

(5) A judge should not disclose or use nonpublic information acquired in a judicial capacity for any purpose unrelated to the judge’s official duties.

(E) Fiduciary Activities. A judge may serve as the executor, administrator, trustee, guardian, or other fiduciary only for the estate, trust, or person of a member of the judge’s family as defined in Canon 4D(4). As a family fiduciary a judge is subject to the following restrictions:

(1) The judge should not serve if it is likely that as a fiduciary the judge would be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge or if the estate, trust, or ward becomes involved in adversary proceedings in the court on which the judge serves or one under its appellate jurisdiction.
(2) While acting as a fiduciary, a judge is subject to the same restrictions on financial activities that apply to the judge in a personal capacity.

(F) Governmental Appointments. A judge may accept appointment to a governmental committee, commission, or other position only if it is one that concerns the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice, or if appointment of a judge is required by federal statute. A judge should not, in any event, accept such an appointment if the judge’s governmental duties would tend to undermine the public confidence in the integrity, impartiality, or independence of the judiciary. A judge may represent the judge’s country, state, or locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with historical, educational, and cultural activities.

(G) Chambers, Resources, and Staff. A judge should not to any substantial degree use judicial chambers, resources, or staff to engage in extrajudicial activities permitted by this Canon.

(H) Compensation, Reimbursement, and Financial Reporting. A judge may accept compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the law-related and extrajudicial activities permitted by this Code if the source of the payments does not give the appearance of influencing the judge in the judge’s judicial duties or otherwise give the appearance of impropriety, subject to the following restrictions:

(1) Compensation should not exceed a reasonable amount nor should it exceed what a person who is not a judge would receive for the same activity.

(2) Expense reimbursement should be limited to the actual costs of travel, food, and lodging reasonably incurred by the judge and, where appropriate to the occasion, by the judge’s spouse or relative. Any additional payment is compensation.

(3) A judge should make required financial disclosures, including disclosures of gifts and other things of value, in compliance with applicable statutes and Judicial Conference regulations and directives.

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges#e

[markomalley]

I'm a member of scientific organizations that have issued statements with which I don't agree.  Does that make me biased?

There could be a perception by somebody who doesn't know you that you could be biased. If you were a judge in a case involving an issue dealt with by one of those scientific organizations, it would be reasonable for one of the parties to bring that up in a motion to ask for your recusal.

Another simple type of analogy: if you were a government contracting officer and held shares of Northrop Grumman as part of a retirement fund, would it be reasonable for you to be recused in evaluating a contract where NG was a bidder? Of course not. Having that happen is not damning you as being hopelessly biased, it is merely a statement that there could potentially be a conflict.

Judges should be held to just as high, if not an even higher standard.

(And so nobody confuses me for a Trump apologist, let me repeat: Trump didn't bring up the issue of conflict of interest, he brought up the person's ethnicity as the basis for bias. The former is reasonable. The latter is racist)

[markomalley]

Zionist?  WTF?  Did you come straight here from stormfront?

@Once-Ler @txradioguy

You should have seen what was edited out.

[txradioguy]

Let's see how things look on November 1, and then we can talk.

Yeah....that's what I thought.  All hat...no cattle.

[txradioguy]

@Once-Ler @txradioguy

You should have seen what was edited out.

I can imagine.  I've seen his type before.