>Durham Report
316 pages, by John H. Durham, SpeCIAl Counsel
Like lashes from a whip?
Or like rivulets of water flowing to and fro the center of life?
>https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/060523zor_d1o3.pdf
AsociaciĂłn de Periodistas de Puerto Rico, Petitioner
v.
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, et al.
Docketed: November 3, 2021
Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Puerto Rico
Other:
Party name: Overseas Press Club of Puerto Rico
Jack Revels Tucker Jordan
Counsel of Record Jack Jordan
3102 Howell Street
North Kansas City, MO 64116
jack.jordan@emobilawyer.com 8167461955
Party name: Jack Jordan
https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-659.html
North KC lawyer disbarred after accusing judges of lying, committing crimes
TOPEKA, Kan. (WIBW) - A North Kansas City lawyer has been disbarred after he accused federal judges of lying and committing crimes.
The Kansas Supreme Court says that in Case No. 124,956: In the Matter of Jack R.T. Jordan, it ordered Jordan’s disbarment. Jordan had been a North Kansas City, Mo., attorney admitted to practice in the state of Kansas since 2019.
The Court said it agreed with a recommendation from the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys panel and the Disciplinary Administrator’s Office that Jordan should be disbarred for misconduct. The incident came during federal court proceedings that had been initiated to get a “Powers email” document under the federal Freedom of Information act.
Across various pleadings, court documents indicate that Jordan persistently accused various federal judges of lying about an email’s contents, lying about the law and committing crimes - which included conspiring with others to conceal a document.
The Court noted that it found Jordan had engaged in serious misconduct which included making frivolous claims, disobeying obligations under tribunal rules, making false or reckless statements about the qualifications or integrity of judges, and committing conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law.
According to the Court, Jordan denied the allegations and argued discipline could not be imposed due to his First Amendment-protected statements. He also claimed the assertions have not been proven false.
In a unanimous decision, the Court said it set out the panel’s detailed factual findings and conclusions and Jordan’s challenges to them. The Court found clear and convincing evidence that established his multiple violations of the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct and held that disbarment is appropriate.
Copyright 2022 WIBW. All rights reserved.
https://www.wibw.com/2022/10/23/north-kc-lawyer-disbarred-after-accusing-judges-lying-committing-crimes/
“Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.” Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 479-80 (1966) quoting Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 485 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting).
Government offices don’t commit crimes, but government employees definitely do. Here, the lawyer stated that federal judges had lied by making particular assertions and they committed particular federal offenses. To repress such heretical speech, the federal judges sought to have Kansas justices disbar the attorney. That fact, alone, speaks volumes. It defies common sense that the federal judges would not, themselves (if they could), disbar the attorney. They still have not done so–even though (over a two year period) the Chief Judge of the federal court of the judges that the lawyer criticized has issued three show cause orders.
Kansas justices’ contentions purportedly supporting disbarment provide clear and convincing evidence that their own contentions were false. It is impossible to identify any evidence (much less evidence that is clear and convincing) that the lawyer’s statements violated any rule of conduct. To date, no one (including any judge or government attorney) has been able to identify any evidence that any statement by the lawyer was false, frivolous or prejudiced the administration of justice in any way. They cannot show us the evidence because it does not exist. Many judges and government lawyers have tried to find it. It cannot be done.
Posted by: Jack Jordan | Feb 28, 2023 6:14:34 AM
https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2022/10/the-kansas-supreme-court-this-is-a-contested-attorney-discipline-proceeding-against-jack-rt-jordan-of-north-kansas-city.html
Rule #11 Quadrillion: Criticism of employees of the Judicial Branch is not protected free-speech under the 1st Amendment because the Judicial Branch said so.