BULLETINS FROM ALOHA

JUDGES/JUSTICES WHO LIE  --  After fifteen years of public service on the United States Supreme Court, Chief Justice Earl Warren decided in 1968  it was time to plan his departure and so notified President Lyndon Johnson.   President Johnson decided to tap his close friend and Associate Justice Abe Fortas to become Chief Justice.  Because Johnson was a lame duck and the Democratic leaders in Congress had become weak, it was not altogether certain Justice Fortas's nomination would be approved.   Even though he would not necessarily have to testify before the Judiciary Committee because Justice Fortas was already sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court, he decided to appear anyway, confident in his abilities before the Senate committee.  Ego and greed spelled his undoing.  When asked about his relationship with President Johnson, he elected to lie.  In truth and in fact, Justice Fortas had a direct (red-button) telephone line to President Johnson where he proposed candidates for presidential appointments, drafted presidential statements and was active on weekly war luncheons with President Johnson regarding Vietnam.  Yet, when asked about same, he lied to the senators.  It was then disclosed that his former law firm was laundering money in order that he got paid $15,000 for teaching during the summer at American University.  The final straw that took even his Associate Justice job was the further disclosure that he had accepted (then returned) $20,000 per year for life for advising a client while also sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court.  (Keep in mind that justices on the U.S. Supreme Court were only paid $39,000 at the time.) 

FUN SUPREME COURT FACTS  --  Can you guess whether sitting Supreme Court justices rule without reading the materials sent to them by lawyers, relying instead on memorandums provided them by their staff?   Is it legal to delegate the responsibility to read the briefs and other materials submitted to them by the parties then rule based on the clerk's memorandums rather than the submitted materials themselves?

The United States Supreme Court had over 8,000 petitions for certiorari submitted to them last year and accepted only 80 of them for an opinion   --   this is the lowest number of opinions for the last ten years. (Source  --  Linda Greenhouse, NY Times) 

The American Bar Association goal is that 90% of all discretionary cases taken for review should be disposed of within 365 days of filing.  The Supreme Court of Oregon takes 834 days.    The Oregon State Bar  and the Appellate Process Review Committee is to reexamine the appellate process in Oregon in 2007.  Chief Justice Paul De Muniz delivered the first ever "State of the Oregon Courts" to the Salem City Club on January 12, 2007.  You can watch a video of this presentation at www.cctvsalem.org then select 'archived government meetings' then find 'State of the Courts.'  For the written materials contact the Oregon Department of Justice.