Lawyers are required and responsible to report all misconduct
- unless it affects the integrity of the judicial system
- unless it is self incriminating
- unless it adversely affected their client
The Attorney General must be a lawyer.
The Attorney General must follow the U.S. Constitution, their state Constitution and the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Attorney General Kathleen Kane is the chief law enforcement officer in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and is responsible for law enforcement, prosecution and review while representing the Commonwealth in all actions brought by or against the Commonwealth.
Attorney General Kathleen Kane did not address the absolute failure of the Supreme Court to take any action to address the denial of constitutional rights of the plaintiffs.
RULE 1.6 Lawyers are not required to report 'misconduct' where it affects the integrity of the judicial system
Attorney General Kathleen Kane did not address the failure of the Attorney Generals office to act to address the denial of constitutional rights of the plaintiffs.
Rule 1.6 Lawyers are not required to report 'misconduct' where is is self-incriminating.
Attorney General Kathleen Kane took no action to address the law which causes her to take no action as that would reveal the improper actions of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania when the law was enacted.
Rule 1.6 Lawyers are not required to report 'misconduct' where it adversely affects the client.
Rule 1.6 prevented Attorney General Kathleen Kane from acting to address the loss of constitutionally protected rights and privileges of the Plaintiffs which the Rule itself was causing to be denied.
Rule 1.6 has a 'self-defense mechanism' which prevents it from being addressed by anyone who is required to follow the Rules of Professional Conduct. No Lawyer, District Attorney, or Attorney General could 'lawfully' take any action to address the loss of constitutionally protected rights and privileges of the plaintiffs.
Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information prevents the Attorney General from taking any action to address the plaintiffs loss of rights as any action taken
- would reveal the unconstitutional actions of The Supreme Court;
- would adversely affect her client, The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; and
- would be self-incriminating as the Attorney General is responsible for law enforcement.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court who had enacted the law could not take any action to address the unconstitutional law as Rule 1.6 prevented them from any action which was self-incriminating.
The Judicial Conduct Board and the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania are subject to Rule 1.6 which renders them without authority to address the injustice when constitutional rights are being affected.
The author of Rule 1.6 who presented The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and the Supreme Courts of the other states, with the law to enact was equally protected from exposure as any action to reveal the unconstitutional result of the law was protected by Rule 1.6 - CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION.
Every aspect of Rule 1.6 prevents the Attorney General, the Supreme Court, every District Attorney and every lawyer subject to the rule from taking responsible and ethical action to address the loss of the constitutional rights of the litigant.
Violations of Rule 1.6 subject a lawyer to disciplinary action, causing the plaintiffs to be denied the assistance of legal professionals to assist them in their effort.
Rule 1.6 is an unconstitutional 'law' which of and through itself defies any effort to address its unlawful and unconstitutional status UNLESS petitioned by persons who are not required by law to follow Rule 1.6... Non-lawyer, pro se plaintiffs acting lawfully with proper standing with a valid cause for relief in the proper forum with jurisdiction for the Unconstitutionality of the law to be presented.
No comments:
Post a Comment