There's whispers going around that this might happen because they haven't been paid in many months because of the shutdown. And could you blame them?
As the U.S. government shutdown disrupts paychecks for federal workers across the country, it is exacerbating the financial woes of lawyers who defend the poorest members of society when they are accused of federal crimes.
Some of the private attorneys who work as court-appointed lawyers for indigent federal criminal defendants have stopped taking new cases and have argued that their clients are being denied their right to effective counsel, according to court records and defense lawyers.
About 12,000 private lawyers across the U.S. serve on court-managed panels that provide counsel to defendants who cannot afford to hire an attorney. The program that compensates these lawyers under the Criminal Justice Act ran out of money in early July, and the shutdown - now in its 34th day - has resulted in Congress not authorizing any new funding.
Lawyers who serve on these panels represent about 40% of criminal cases against people who cannot afford attorneys, according to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The remaining 60% of indigent cases are handled by full-time federal public defenders who work for the court system. Since mid-October, they have been working without pay as well.
4 comments:
Nothing will happen. A few lawyers will stop taking cases. The rest will "do the right thing" while the government continues to treat them like a doormat. Why would the criminal defense bar band together and grind the system to a halt? What would that do.......
This post inadvertently raises an issue that strikes at the heart of our constitutional order. The Constitution is a litany of what are called negative rights. There is no mandate on what the government must affirmatively do for its citizens but there are a laundry list of what the government cannot do to its citizens. Free speech, religious freedom, etc. So taken to its logical conclusion, what happens when the government must provide a service to an individual that requires the expenditure of public funds that are not there? One person's right to money is another person's obligation to pay it. Taken to its logical end, the judiciary then becomes a bastardized version of the IRS, sending the US Marshal out to collect money to enforce a constitutional right. We see this strand of thought in the Left's proclamation that health care, housing, and food are all human rights. At some point, the proverbial rubber will meet the road.
I don’t think it’s a left vs right thing to say that the sick should be left to die, that the homeless should have no shelter, and that the hungry should starve. Unless you’re a Fox News host that says kill the homeless I guess. Or MAGA saying don’t even let them eat cake. It’s pretty much a morality thing. For some it’s a religious thing - you know that whole do unto others etc. It’s not about law, it’s about conscience. Some people think they have because they are worthy and therefore those who don’t aren’t. But they’re called human rights because everyone should get them… because they’re human. I guess not everyone thinks that’s a thing. But you’d think again should you find yourself - or someone you love - in need.
For them... dark MAGA nepotism works well...
Post a Comment