Jump to content


Photo

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. The City of New York


  • Please log in to reply
185 replies to this topic

#181 domin8

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,168 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 13

Posted 14 August 2019 - 01:08 PM

Anyone is as long as they've paid $100 for admission to the bar. Or whatever it costs now. It doesn't mean he should be allowed to intervene on behalf of a municipal respondent and contradict the party's filed briefs.

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

When I lived in Illinois I shared a driveway with a Navy JAG officer. He said there was some sort of credentialing that had to be done. I'm going off of that.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk



#182 gunuser17

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 155 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 17

Posted 14 August 2019 - 02:50 PM

Supreme Court of the United States

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR

 

Attached is the application form for your personal statement, as required by Supreme Court Rule 5.2, including space for endorsement by two sponsors. The sponsors must be members of the Bar of this Court who know you personally and are not related to you by blood or marriage. One of the sponsors or another member of the Bar, including a relative, may move your admission. ... You must obtain a certificate of good standing from the presiding judge, clerk, or other authorized official of the highest court of a State, Commonwealth, Territory or Possession, or of the District of Columbia, evidencing the fact that you have been a member of the Bar of such court for at least three years and are in good standing. ...   To qualify for admission to the Bar of this Court, an applicant must ... not have been the subject of any adverse disciplinary action pronounced or in effect during that 3-year period; and must appear to the Court to be of good moral and professional character.

 

2. Each applicant shall file with the Clerk (1) a certificate from the presiding judge, clerk, or other authorized official of that court evidencing the applicant’s admission to practice there and the applicant’s current good standing, and (2) a completely executed copy of the form approved by this Court and furnished by the Clerk containing (a) the applicant’s personal statement, and (B) the statement of two sponsors endorsing the correctness of the applicant’s statement, stating that the applicant possesses all the qualifications required for admission, and affirming that the applicant is of good moral and professional character. Both sponsors must be members of the Bar of this Court who personally know, but are not related to, the applicant.

 

3. If the documents submitted demonstrate that the applicant possesses the necessary qualifications, and if the applicant has signed the oath or affirmation and paid the required fee, the Clerk will notify the applicant of acceptance by the Court as a member of the Bar and issue a certificate of admission.  ...

 

4. Each applicant shall sign the following oath or affirmation: I, ........................................................ , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that as an attorney and as a counselor of this Court, I will conduct myself uprightly and according to law, and that I will support the Constitution of the United States. All original signatures must be on one page together.



#183 domin8

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,168 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 13

Posted 14 August 2019 - 03:15 PM

So there is a credentialing process Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

#184 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,025 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 15 August 2019 - 01:54 PM

Not really. The rules are boilerplate that's required by every Article III court for bar admission. This isn't any different as far as I can tell since the rules for admission to district and circuit courts are the same (last I checked). Two unrelated sponsors, check. I ignore that good moral character nonsense because of how many scumbag lawyers I know of who have never had any disciplinary actions taken against them despite clear evidence of fraud perpetrated on the court. Or they have but it's been several years since then. In fact, I have personal knowledge of two lawyers who have been to federal prison for tax crimes, who still practice law, licenses in good standing, stipulated to have licenses suspended while in prison, and both of whom would qualify for admission to the Supreme Court Bar if they have their two SCOTUS-admitted sponsors. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#185 Charles Nichols

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 302 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 16

Posted 15 August 2019 - 07:54 PM

Not really. The rules are boilerplate that's required by every Article III court for bar admission. This isn't any different as far as I can tell since the rules for admission to district and circuit courts are the same (last I checked). Two unrelated sponsors, check. I ignore that good moral character nonsense because of how many scumbag lawyers I know of who have never had any disciplinary actions taken against them despite clear evidence of fraud perpetrated on the court. Or they have but it's been several years since then. In fact, I have personal knowledge of two lawyers who have been to federal prison for tax crimes, who still practice law, licenses in good standing, stipulated to have licenses suspended while in prison, and both of whom would qualify for admission to the Supreme Court Bar if they have their two SCOTUS-admitted sponsors. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

I know of a lawyer who "was suspended for one year, stayed, placed on two years of probation with a 30-day actual suspension..." 

 

He was subsequently admitted to the SCOTUS bar.

 

Paying a small filing fee, and getting two references ain't much of a hurdle.



#186 Charles Nichols

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 302 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 16

Posted 19 August 2019 - 04:09 PM

Update in the Cheeseman case, "Aug 19 2019 Response Requested. (Due September 18, 2019)"

 

The Respondents can ask for an up to sixty day extension to file the Response.  One would think they would simply boilerplate one of their previously filed responses.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users