To: Justice Elena Kagan

United States Supreme Court

1 First Street Northeast, 

Washington, DC 20543


Re:  Judicial Corruption 

by Lauren Paulson

  Thursday, January 8, 2015

Dear Justice Kagan:  


Not so fast.  Is it relevant to ask again what Paul Krugman just asked in his November 9, 2014 article in The New York Times?  Is there reason to worry about corruption at the U.S. Supreme Court?


It was an impressive appearance at the Princeton University, broadcast on C-SPAN on November 20, 2014! U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan was interviewed by Christopher L. Eisgruber, the President of Princeton University.  Justice Kagan dismissed Economist Krugman’s written concern about U.S. Supreme Court corruption with the cursory assessment:  ‘ridiculous…, honestly’.  




Not so fast.  We did not ‘get over the Dred Scott decision . Nor should we ‘get over’ the Bush v. Gore  decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000 for the reasons outlined below in my report “Legal Rot”.  As for legal corruption among the judiciary; it is rampant.  Across the divide.  Link to for an extensive recent report on the problem.

The U.S. Supreme Court is the titular head of this problem and cannot afford to be dismissive.  It would be wise to pay attention to Mr. Krugman’s alert.  ‘If someone is trying to put you onto something, you need to listen’.



QUESTION FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND LEGAL COMMUNITY:  What if the legal profession/legal community is as ethically and morally bankrupt as our financial community?  Locally and nationally?


Executive Summary


The Objective of this report is to ask the Legal Community if the same corruption that visited the Financial Community beginning in the 1970’s has also infected The Legal Profession from top to bottom.  What if such ‘legal rot’ results in the absolute loss of Due Process and The Rule of Law to plain citizens?


There is a disconnect between what is being taught in Law Schools and what is really happening in the Courtrooms of America.  I know.  I have directly been involved in major litigation from Coast-to-Coast, across the entire United States for over forty (40) years.  

In short, Law Schools teach through the Case Law Method.  The Case Law Method, also known as The Common Law; requires lonely law students to read thousands and thousands of pages of case law.  The goal of this law school teaching method is to drill into a student’s head how case law works and how it is supposed to set The Rule of Law.  It is a sham.  Judges do not necessarily follow case law.  Many judges follow Natural Law.  

The reality is that judges often do what they want without regard to case law or precedent --  contrary to what law students are taught.  For example, one author has noted that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas does “...not believe in stare decisis, the law of precedent.”  Jeffrey Tobin, The Nine, Doubleday, 2007, Page 102




The Solution is simple.  But, first the Legal Profession has to recognize that judges at all levels and throughout the United States brazenly ignore The Rule of Law and Due Process.  A Formal, National System of Judicial Performance Evaluations (JPE) will shine a spotlight on the Rot of the Judiciary and provide a blueprint for a comprehensive solution found below.

It is absolutely essential to understand the difference between the Common Law and Natural  Law to see what is going on.

Definitions Required for Further Reading: 

The Law

COMMON LAW  --  Law developed by judicial decisions.  This is the Anglo-American legal tradition which adheres to the principle of stare decisis (“let the decision stand”).  This doctrine holds that judges must look to past judicial decisions or Man-made legislated laws to answer the case before them presenting identical or similar questions.  Kermit L. Hall, ed., The Oxford Guide to the Supreme Court, Page 197 (2005)


NATURAL LAW  --  This is the philosophical doctrine holding that there is a certain order in nature that provides norms for human conduct.  It proposes that people can grasp certain principles through practical reason divined by nature and God.   If a judge makes decisions based on instincts and subjective reasoning then the philosopher George Santayana would call that Man’s imitation of divinity.  Will Durant, The Story of Philosophy, (1926-1961) Page 493



Judges Should Be Following the Common Law  --  They aren’t.  Instead judges are following Natural Law otherwise called ‘Legal Realism’ by some.  

Aquinas conceived of what is now known as the laws of nature.  The Laws of Nature so conceived are different from Man-made laws such as statutes and case law.  Judges are required to follow Man-made laws which are known as The Rules of Law.  We are supposed to be a country subject to The Rules of Law.  Laws of Nature are different.  When judges follow the Laws of Nature they are being “free agents”.  They are not applying nor following the Laws of Man.  Therefore, they are not following Common Law.  They are not following the Law of Precedents otherwise known as stare decisisSTARE DECISIS Lat. "to stand by that which is decided." The principal is that the precedent (previous) decisions are to be followed by the courts.  It is only through this predictability can lawyers knowledgeably advise their clients.  Stare Decisis is missing in action in our present legal system.  We are not a country subject to The Rule of Law when judges follow the laws of nature or do whatever they want when they want.  Lawyers cannot  knowledgeably advise clients if judges do not follow established case law.   See below.  

Laws of Nature should be left to those who discovered them in the first place:  scientists.  Laws of Nature should be left to those who discovered them in the first place:  philosophers.  Laws of human conduct i.e., Man-made laws or statutory laws are made by legislatures. Laws of Nature are discovered by scientists and philosophers.  Man-made Laws are supposed to be discovered and applied by judges based on decisions in previous cases.  Once so discovered and applied, these laws are supposed to be followed by subsequent judicial rulings as precedent.  The public cannot possibly know how to conduct themselves in the field of human affairs unless they can rely on judge-made law or Common Law from previous judicial decisions.  This analysis describes legal realism.   

As stated above, “Aquinas conceives the Laws of Nature which the scientist discovers as laws implanted in the very nature of things at their creation by God.”  Mortimer Adler, Great Ideas, The Lexicon of Western Thought, Macmillan Publishing Company, Page 417(1952, 1992)

The problem is that the judiciary has decided that it is free to follow the Laws of Nature; that is, the laws divined by God, rather than the Common Law.  In a word, judges have decided they are Gods and may follow their own instincts and do not have to follow Man-made law.  This chaotic process started in your lifetime.  


From the Biggest Court to the Trial Courts


  1.   THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT  --  Equal Protection Clause  --  Bush v. Gore


The Supreme Court, in a per curiam opinion, ruled that the Florida Supreme Court's decision, calling for a statewide recount, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This ruling was by a 7-2 vote, but (as discussed more fully in the next subsection below) two of the seven disagreed with the Court's remedy for the Equal Protection violation. The Court held that the Equal Protection Clause guarantees to individuals that their ballots cannot be devalued by "later arbitrary and disparate treatment". Even if the recount was fair in theory, it was unfair in practice. The record, as weighed by the Florida Supreme Court, suggested that different standards were seemingly applied to the recount from ballot to ballot, precinct to precinct, and county to county, even when identical types of ballots and machines were used.  Justice O’Connor who now says the Court should never have taken the case,  but stated at the earlier announcement that Gore had won Florida: “this is terrible”.  Then she ruled for Bush; her bias already revealed.  Recusal would have been in order. If there was no corruption in the U.S. Supreme Court.     

According to the Court, the statewide standard (that a "legal vote" is "one in which there is a 'clear indication of the intent of the voter'") could not guarantee that each county would count the votes in a constitutionally permissible fashion. 


 The Court stated that the per curiam opinion's applicability was "limited to the present circumstances, for the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities.”  So much for the U.S. Supreme Court being the precedent setting court………..!


Analysis  --  Consider for a moment if Chief Justice Taney had suggested such a thing in the corrupt Dred Scott decision of 1857.  The worst U.S. Supreme Court decision prior to Bush v. Gore.  


Consistent with the Common Law/Natural Law analysis above, the 

U.S. Supreme Court simply wanted to make a ruling from the gut instead of from the U. S. Constitution just as Justice Taney did a century and half before.  Who are we kidding?


The reoccurrence of the U.S. Immigration problem since the 1986 fix is nothing more than a failure to enforce the 1986 law or the failure to follow The Rule of Law on a grand scale and is another form of corruption.  “For 20 years our country has done basically nothing to enforce the 1986 legislation against either the employers who hired illegal immigrants or those who crossed our borders illegally to work for them.”  Janet Napolitano, The Myth of Amnesty, The Washington Post (6/10/07)


In short, the law makers became the law breakers because nobody was following nor applying The Rule of Law.  Nationally.  



2.  THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS  --  Has the Highest Reversal Rate of any Circuit (Roy E. Hofer, Supreme Court Reversal Rates, ABA Journal 2010).  It has a reversal rate of 81%.


A Court reversed 81% of the time....!?  Consider the attorney, being asked by an erstwhile client, about the chances on appeal to the Ninth Circuit from the U.S. District Court of Oregon.  Or any of the U.S. District Courts in the Western States?  


It is so bad in the Ninth Circuit that there is a “....9th Circuit Watch.”  In fact, there are many.  Many.  


The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is regarded as a Rogue Court.  Recently, Northwestern School of Law  of Lewis and Clark College honored Ninth Circuit Court Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain.  Judge O’Scannlain has written about this problem where he “.....ponders ten years of reversals.”  Harvard Law & Policy Review (September 27, 2010)  14 Lewis & Clark Law Review 1558 (2010)   Senior U.S. District Court Judge Robert Jones once remarked at a legal seminar that in the Ninth Circuit reversals depend entirely on what panel one gets in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.  Ponder that one for a moment.


Analysis  --  Why all these reversalsBecause the Ninth Circuit does not follow the law.  Their former chief, Alex Kozinski is an avowed adherent to Natural Law.  For over thirty years, the Ninth Circuit has been using the wrong standard for Civil Rights cases. Nobody cares.  Even the ACLU doesn’t care. Consider the case of Greg Lang.  Intel fired him because he was black, gay and had AIDS.  Greg Lang v. Intel Corporation, 112 F3d 516 (9th Cir. 1997)


Confirming the U.S. District Court’s toss of the case out of Court, the Ninth Circuit Judges said:

  “We agree that, literally read, the language of 

district court misstates plaintiff’s burden at sum-

mary judgment.”  Lang at 516


Never mind, Greg loses anyway.  In essence, the Ninth Circuit is honoring the trial court’s ignorance of The Rule of Law by dishonoring it themselves.  How can an attorney advise the client if the Courts openly, brazenly and illegally ignore precedent and the standard of law to be applied?  


  1.   U.S. DISTRICT COURT  --  Granted, hard (difficult) cases make bad law.  Foreclosure cases are a perfect example.  The ‘foreclosure tsunami‘ that is sweeping across the nation, worse than an ebola plague; is meeting the front lines of federal courts across the nation.  There is even a website that is keeping up with all this called stop foreclosure fraud.  You can locate all the 404 foreclosure cases filed in the U.S. District Court of Oregon here.

Foreclosure cases are complex and meet four corners of The Rule of Law.  It could have been the judiciary’s finest hour.  An actual examination reveals the opposite  --  local judges are an embarrassment; from top to bottom.  They do not know what they are doing when it comes to foreclosure cases.   


Foreclosure cases mix four of the following complex areas of the law:


  •        Real Estate law governed by case (judge made) law; the common law which is based in deep history.
  •        Commercial law governed by the Uniform Commercial Code (statutory law) pertaining to commercial contracts.
  •        Commercial law governed by the law of Security Interests (statutory law) pertaining to liens and such.
  •        Real Estate law governed by statutory (legislative) enactments.  The entire legislative new approach (from the 1950’s) to real estate law, begins with nonjudicial foreclosure laws (and the concept of ‘trust deeds’ which are not deeds at all!).  All so the banks could get your stuff and your place without the delay and expense of judicial supervision.  We all now see how well that worked.  


Analysis  --  Initially, the judiciary, bastion of intellectual might, was as lost in the weeds as the banks.  Some are still there.  There are some bright spots, but they are ephemeral.  


Let us take the local foreclosure case of Natache Rinegard-Guirma. No different than the rest of us, she wound up behind the economic meltdown eight-ball.  Happily, Judge Michael Garr King of the U.S. District Court of Oregon schooled himself on the applicable law, differentiated these four corners of the complexities of foreclosure law and reached a right result in 2010.  Unfortunately, his magistrate judge (the junior-partner judge) does not have a clue.  Thus, the magistrate’s erroneous rulings in her case that have no foundation in the Common Law whatsoever, leaves Natache spinning in the wind five years later.  Then she will have to run another gauntlet in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals depending on whether The Rule of Law intervenes again or remains absent at the trial court level.  Meanwhile, she is ALSO in full litigation mode in State Court.  See how that gauntlet works in local urban court.  Never mind that our entire legal structure is set up so you don’t have to litigate in two court systems at the same time.  ALL JUDGES are so inept that this basic rule is swept under the rug so downtown law firms can benefit from the full litigation deal.  Think about that.  Corruption?


  1.   STATE SUPREME COURT --  It is a well-kept secret that the Oregon Supreme Court is regarded as the absolute worst appellate court in the entire United States, save two.  This report came in 2008 after an exhaustive, sophisticated study by the Chicago Law School.  The criteria was simple.  Did any other states follow Oregon appellate decisions?  How productive was the Court:  How many written decisions did the Court produce?  Oregon ranked 48th and 49th in those comparisons.  


Analysis  --  Oregon law requires the Oregon Supreme Court to produce a written report to the Oregon Legislature annually following the yearly Judicial Conference.  They don’t.  Oregon law requires the Oregon Supreme Court to select the judges for Oregon’s attorney disciplinary process.  They don’t.  The Oregon legislature put the Oregon Supreme Court on probation in 2012 due to the eCourt fiasco which continues.  Corruption on a grand scale ($200 million taxpayer dollars lost and barely noticed).


It is no accident that former Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court Paul De Muniz retired after only one term.  The replacement is a political appointee.  Think disgraced child molester Neil Goldschmidt and his progeny.  Where oh where is Tom McCall when we need him??


Upon appeal, Oregon law requires the appellate lawyer to notify the County trial court administrator to get the entire trial court record and notify the Oregon Supreme Court accordingly.  Then according to law which requires de novo review, (review of the entire trial court record including the recorded proceedings) the Oregon Supreme Court is then supposed to request the file from the Trial Court Administer.  The Oregon Supreme Court is then supposed to review the entire record before rendering a decision.


They don’t.  The Oregon Supreme Court renders formal decisions without reviewing the trial court record de novo as required by law.  No wonder other state appellate courts pay no attention to Oregon cases.  The U.S. Supreme Court puts its formal stamp of approval on this corruption cacophony.  Because the U.S. Supreme Court reviews less than 1% of the cases appealed there; it puts its imprimatur on virtually all the corrupt cases flowing to it from State Courts.  Ponder 8,000 cases going without review.  


  1.  STATE TRIAL COURTS  --  It will come as no surprise that the state trial courts take their cue accordingly.  Staying on the theme of foreclosure;  --Annette Steele is an impressive and formidable lady from the far end of town.  She was undergoing the lamentable foreclosure meat grinder subjected on thousands of households locally; millions across the nation.  Occupy Portland was watching.  


Analysis  --  Happily there is a record of what happened to her, in trial court, in Judge Alicia Fuch’s courtroom.  Annette Steele and her family were prepared.  She brought her two daughters along to help her present her case.  Pity the poor anonymous bank/servicer lawyer  --   her adversary across the aisle; without his client there.    


At the crucial point of this foreclosure eviction, Ms. Steele’s mustered-forces asked.............asked the crucial, absolutely crucial question.  Where, your honor, are the BLUE ink originals of my loan documents??????”


You could see the color drain out of the the judge’s visage.  Pale.  Wide eyes.  Stammering.  The good judge clearly did not know what to do.  So, she did what any good judge would do.  She called a halt to the proceedings, stepped off the bench and in secret called Presiding Judge Nan Waller for what to do.  The minutes went by.  Everybody fidgeted.  Ms. Steel had brought an entourage of her supporters into the proceedings, so there are witnesses to this pathetic proceeding.  (Click on ‘Video’ link at this website.)


Finally, the good Judge Alicia Fuchs stepped back on the bench, announced that the bank did NOT have to produce original documents, announced that Annette Steele had lost, was going to be evicted, case closed.


Here is the problem.  It is significant.  Oregon’s constitution says many good things.  One of the things it says, is that there may not be secret court proceedings.  In other words, EVERYTHING MUST BE DONE in Open Court: 


    Section 10. Administration of justice. No court shall be secret, but justice shall be administered, openly and without purchase, completely and without delay, and every man shall have remedy by due course of law for injury done him in his person, property, or reputation.”—Constitution of Oregon Article I, Section 10 (2012)


Now, we are talking about an Oregon judge not even following the Oregon State Constitution, in addition to not following The Rule of Law requiring original blue ink documents in foreclosure cases.  Judge Fuchs is barred by the Oregon Constitution from having a ‘secret‘ conversation with another judge during the pendency of Ms Steele’s trial.  This illegal event is corruption, but no one does anything about it.


If I haven’t convinced you yet, let me yield to you two small further examples.  Take Judge Ed Jones in the same state court as Judge Fuchs, telling litigants that he couldn’t deal with a particular foreclosure case, because he didn’t know much about foreclosure law and he punted.  Want to know how pathetic?  I have the video of this lamentable event, free for the asking.


Finally, I wrap up my case in eviction court. Where people’s lives are changed every day by the foreclosure catastrophe and we don’t even send them to a real judge.  Neither do we help them with legal assistance (notwithstanding all the false self-accolades called ‘pro bono’ help.  The website is funded by Bank of America.  It is a fiction. Legal Aid for poor folks is a fiction in Oregon.)  While Oregon law leadership yawns and watches.  Mute.  And holds another award ceremony.  For a fine politically connected lawyer ‘leader’





Any way you look at it; you don’t want to be there.  Eviction Court.  First floor of the Multnomah County Courthouse.  It is a desultory place.  The welcome mat is not there for you.

To get in you have to get naked.  Well almost.  There is a gauntlet of ten (10) uniformed Sheriff/search/security people there to ensure you don’t bring in a bazooka.  I counted them.  Ten.  Uniformed.  Most have their ample arms crossed, gabbing.  

Here are the things I had to take off to be sure I did no harm.  Shoes, wrist watch, belt, computer, keys, telephone, coins...and so on. 

But, get in there I did only to have my heart torn out.

As I walked into room 120, there was something already  going on.  A well-quaffed middle-age woman at one counsel table, an older, skinny woman with unkempt hair at the other.  It seems that my hero had not gotten her mail.  (When one is evicted, getting mail is an uncertain thing).  Thus, the landlord threw her personal property away, but the tenant had not gotten notice-------because she had not gotten her mail.  The Referee  --  they are not real judges, said, “So sad, too bad”.  Yeah, but...........stuttered the aged, skinny one, she did not know the consequences and was out of touch trying to get housing somewhere.  All her belongings gone.  

When the reality sank in, the skinny one began to cry.  No one cared.  Case closed.  Having just got there, I was adjusting to my surroundings and lost touch with the aged one as other cases got called. 


The winners and losers (1% v. 99%) are very obvious.  The diverse  tenants are on tenterhooks; pins and needles even.  The landlords or their representatives have seen it all before and are smug, joking with each other.  The Referee and his staff are joking around and smiling too.


A knot of three or four have ties on.  They mill in and out, full of themselves.  You know the types.  They are all whispering at the Judge’s bench, smiling, looking out at the audience from time-to-time.  There is a woman with five to ten files in her crooked arm sitting front and center.  She, it turns out, is the legal assistant for the three or four lawyers in the room.  All smiling.  All looking confident.  Chatting amiably.



I had all but forgotten about the aged one by now as I went out into the hallway.  I hadn’t seen her from the front, but immediately recognized her from the hair askew as she walked by.  On impulse, I asked her if she knew about Legal Aid Services of Oregon located on 921 Washington St., nearby.  She looked at me with beseeching eyes and asked  “............isn’t it too late??  Now, I got a good look at her.  


She was literally crushed.  She was Sad beyond description.  Devastated. Lost.  I stammered that maybe something could be done, like an appeal.  She fell almost onto my shoulder, streaming grateful tears.  Her countenance and aged face are from The Grapes of Wrath. Beautiful in some sort of way.  But, so torn apart.  So very sad.  Crushed.  Her lined face contorted; eyes drowned by tears.

Eviction Court in Portland, Oregon.  Any weekday.




The Solution is simple.  But, first the Legal Profession has to recognize that judges at all levels and throughout the United States brazenly ignore The Rule of Law and Due Process.  A Formal, National System of Judicial Performance Evaluations (JPE) will shine a spotlight on the Rot of the Judiciary and provide a blueprint for a comprehensive solution found below.

By-the-by, the Ninth Circuit got a new Chief Judge in late 2014.  His former law firm represents Bank of America.  What effect will this have on foreclosure cases in the Ninth Circuit?  Who is responsible for ensuring that consumers have a fair trial in the Ninth Circuit notwithstanding this clear conflict of interest?  Hello, U.S. Supreme Court.  

  Law Schools are defrauding the public if they do not teach the realities of the Market Place, the realities of legal incompetence and the realities of judicial corruption in Oregon and across the divide. 

The solution to the due process problem was identified in 2005 by the American Bar Association (ABA).  The ABA produced a comprehensive program of judicial performance evaluations.  In 2006, the University of Denver produced a complete template for installing a formal performance evaluation program for judges in every state.  Thus far, almost half of the states have done so.  Oregon is lagging.  Lagging badly.  Where in the wide-wide world is the legal community’s leadership?  

by Lauren Paulson cbulletinsfromaloha(2015)  All links available and accessible at the website:   Or leave a message there with your email address and I will send an electronic copy for easy links.  

/S/Lauren Paulson

16131 W. Hoffeldt Ln #38

Brookings, OR 97415

Posted on Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 04:19PM by Registered CommenterLAUREN PAULSON | CommentsPost a Comment | References2 References


Wednesday, December 17, 2014


Chief Judge Sidney Thomas--Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

James F. Battin Federal Building & U.S. Courthouse

2601 2nd Ave. North

Billings, MT 59101


Re:  Judicial Complaint Manifold

Bankrupt Bankruptcy Courts

Consider this Dichotomy  --  


“Finally, the paramount interest of the creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views in the settlement and sale consistent with my oral findings and conclusions stated on the record today.  I said what I planned to say on the record.”  Hon. Randall Dunn in U.S. Bankruptcy Court Case No. 09-32439-RLD11/7 on May 7, 2010 in my foreclosure case. 




Donald Trump explaining how he got out of Atlantic City seven (7) years ago, but made a lot of money.  He said:  “I do play the bankruptcy laws.  Not individually, but corporately.”  I buy a building in turmoil, large mortgage then I throw it into a chapter…” in bankruptcy.  “I use it  (bankruptcy)….as a (business tool).”  Donald Trump inter- viewed on CSPAN at The Economic Club on December 15, 2014.

Dear Chief Judge Thomas:


It is with appreciation on your ascending to be Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit and it is with dismay at what has transcended before, to me; that I send you this note.    

My immediate purpose in writing is to ensure that the lofty words at the passing of the gavel this month are true.  Over one year ago I sent a Judicial Complaint to the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council enclosed and have heard nothing since.  I have made periodic telephone calls to Gwen Babtiste and periodic letters to Cathy Catterson enclosed, without result.  Hence my contact with you.

No doubt you will be interested in looking over these matters yourself to find out if the lofty words deserve additional attention and your incredulous dismay.

Thank you for your interest and consideration.  

Very truly yours,

/S/ Lauren Paulson

Posted on Monday, December 29, 2014 at 08:17PM by Registered CommenterLAUREN PAULSON | Comments2 Comments | References21 References



Are Needed Right Now

by Lauren (Pug) Paulson

Poet Emily Dickinson tells us she died for beauty.  Her fellow traveler observed that truth, for which he died, is a kinsman to beauty. 

Justice, on the other hand, may have no soul for dying.  The soul is the sum of our mental self.  

Justice is blind we are told.  Indeed. Let us try to shine a little light for seeing, a little heat for thinking  —  on justice just for starters. 

Will Durant, in his book The Story of Philosophy, Simon and Schuster (1961) helps us with Plato’s take on all this.  The only things worthwhile in life are justice, truth and beauty.  Emily is on the right path.  The concept of justice is what is in peril and is where we must start.   

A just person is in the right place at the right time; giving and receiving in equal and just proportions. This leads to the harmonious whole. Mr. Durant likens this to a perfect orchestra playing beautiful music with each musician doing a proper part for the good of the whole. 

So organized, a society is fit for survival; justice receives a kind of Darwinian sanction. Where society is composed of those out of their natural places trouble looms. If a business person subordinates the statesman or the unfit become judges then the coordination of the parts is destroyed; society disintegrates and dissolves. Justice disappears due to the loss of effective coordination.  Consider, for a moment, who in our society is accountable for whether or not there is the harmonious coordination of the judiciary as a whole!?  

Every individual is either part of an effective cosmos or part of a defective chaos.  There is either benign coordination where heat and light shines on action or emotion and greed prevail; replacing the intellect. Where emotion and greed prevail, society disintegrates. John Rawls, Harvard professor, pointed out that the failure of judges and others in authority to apply the appropriate rule or to interpret it correctly violates each citizen’s right to be protected by the principle of the rule of law.  

Justice with truth provides the order and the beauty of all parts of the soul.  All that is required are fanatics; people of action, of ideas and those who respect those souls who are helping in coordinating the harmonious whole.  Truth will result. Then justice.  Then beauty.  

















No. 449


I died for Beauty—but was scarce

Adjusted in the Tomb

When One who died for Truth, was lain

in an adjoining Room—


He questioned softly “Why I failed”?

“For Beauty,” I replied—

“And I—for Truth—-Themself are One—

We Bretheren, are,”  He said—


And so, as Kinsmen, met a Night—-



Emily Dickinson






Posted on Tuesday, November 25, 2014 at 04:44PM by Registered CommenterLAUREN PAULSON | CommentsPost a Comment | References6 References



by Lauren (Pug) Paulson


To: Bill Scanlon  CSpan

James Oliphant, National Journal


Re: Judicial Performance Evaluations


Date: Thursday, October 30, 2014





I watched your recent discussion on how judges are selected with enraptured attention.  Here is the Third Stool of the Discussion  —  Judicial Performance Evaluations.  (JPE) Here is the Third-Rail of that discussion.  I got drummed out of the Board of Governors of the Oregon State Bar AND out of the Bar itself over my support of Judicial Performance Evaluations for all of the judiciary in 2004.  Judges are dead set for Judicial Independence (read they can “do what they want”).  Former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin described it as “legal realism” .  Judges are dead set against Judicial Performance Evaluations because it makes them accountable to the Rule of Law and accountable to the stream of citizens that seek justice before them every day:  citizens that have the power to vote them out of office in states with judicial elections.  


If one looks at where we are at in 2014, the story really begins in 1971 with the Lewis Powell memo.  






In 1971, Lewis F. Powell, then a corporate lawyer and member of the boards of 11 corporations, wrote a memo to his friend Eugene Sydnor, Jr., the Director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The memorandum was dated August 23, 1971, two months prior to Powell’s nomination by President Nixon to the U.S. Supreme Court. Future Justice Powell stated that, “Strength lies in organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and national organizations.”


What followed is a well orchestrated, long term plan to stifle the left and to stuff the dissent of the 1960’s and begin to nurture schools, think tanks and corporations in a new way of thinking. The following is no accident, but flowed directly from the conservative metamorphoses and Powell’s call to action of 1971 in the law.

National Center for State Courts (NCSC) -- Formed in 1971 by Richard Nixon and Chief Justice Warren Burger. Its mission is for judicial reform and judicial administration improvements in the courts of the U.S. The American Judges Association is an NCSC partner. Some of their meetings are secret.

1973 —  The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) began in 1973 as part of this conservative process.  

1980’s -- The Federalist Society -- Formed in 1982, it is a group of conservatives and libertarians dedicated to reforming the current legal order. It now has chapters in 196 law schools. But, yet more:

American Inns of Court -- This concept began in the 1970‘s in Utah through the School of Law at Brigham Young University. Finally and formally formed in 1983 by Chief Justice Warren Burger the Inns are an amalgam of judges, lawyers, law professors and law students. Their stated mission is to foster excellence in professionalism, ethics, civility and legal skills.  Some of their proceedings are secret.  

Hon. Ken Starr is a trustee of the Inns of Court Foundation.  All the awards designated by the Inns are named after Republican jurists including one in Sandra Day-O’Connor’s name.  

State Justice Institute -- Formed in 1984, its mission is to ensure access to a fair and effective justice system. It serves to provide grants to State courts and to finance the activities of the National Center for State Courts with taxpayer money.   

In 1999, the State Justice Institute commissioned the National Center for State Courts to produce The Anti-Government Guidebook.  This 200 page tome instructs judges on how to cope with unruly consumers who represent themselves sans lawyers in court proceedings.  

American Judicature Society -- The American Judicature Society created the Center for Judicial Independence in 1997 in response to an increase in perceived unfair criticism and efforts to remove from the bench judges who have issued unpopular rulings.  

During the summer of 2011, The American Judicature Society conducted a nationwide survey of Judicial Nominating Commissioners. Nominating commissions exist in 36 states and the District of Columbia to recruit, screen, evaluate, and recommend individuals for appointment to fill vacancies in the state courts.

The American Judicature Society is partially sponsored by Bank of America.  

Some of their proceedings are secret.  

The American Judicature Society has recently announced they are transferring their book of business to the National Center for State Courts.  

This long-term focus began paying off handsomely in the 1980s, in coordination with the Reagan Administration’s “hands-off business” philosophy.


The American Bar Association recommended that each state adopt a formal system of Judicial Performance Evaluations a decade ago. 

The stealth campaign by former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor at the federal level and former Oregon State Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul De Muniz at the state level is to nudge us to judicial self-SELECTION rather than judicial Elections.  Each state already has a powerful oligarchy who controls things in their state.  The ‘SELECTION’ effort is simply a method to put more power in each state’s legal oligarchical hands and away from simple judicial elections by citizens.


A formal statewide system of Judicial Performance Evaluations would give the citizenry the information necessary to make the present mosaic of judicial elections work.  In addition, it would provide a meaningful system of accountability of our judiciary, at every level, who have presently run amuck.  Think, BUSH V. GORE.


Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2014 at 11:08AM by Registered CommenterLAUREN PAULSON | Comments4 Comments | References5 References


The Innocent on Death Row


“The exoneration of two North Carolina men who spent 30 years in prison — one on death row — provides a textbook example of so much that is broken in the American justice system. And it is further evidence (as though more were needed) that the death penalty is irretrievably flawed as well as immoral.”


LEGAL ROT by Lauren Paulson

In 1963, I was on ‘shore patrol’ for the U.S. Army’s 82nd Airborne Division out of Ft. Bragg, North Carolina.  In a similar role to the Navy’s ‘shore patrol’ our job was collecting those soldiers who had acted out, and were usually drunk.  On duty in Fayetteville North Carolina, we would put them in the back of a 3/4 ton truck and transport them back, without further ado, to base. 

Others were not so lucky.  We waited for our soldiers at the Fayetteville police station where there was an ‘interrogation’ booth in the middle of the Fayetteville police office space.  Built like a cubicle with a door, it was a wood structure to waist height, and opaque glass above that almost to the ceiling.  

During the night, the quarry of the local police would be led to the ‘cubicle’ and the door closed.  Soon there would be sounds of a scuffle, then outright sounds of a beating with grunts of the victim (the putative criminal) and even cries for the beating to stop; then silence.  Soon, the thoroughly beaten ‘criminal defendant’ would be led away, bloodied, battered and white.  White with fear, that is.  The beaten men were usually black.  The slave market was the honored memorial in downtown Fayetteville at the time.  

The process would repeat itself as the night wore on.  We transported our chastened, but unbeaten soldiers back to camp, then returned to hear the walls of the cubicle rattle again and again as another victim was led to the booking station for further processing into the night.  Processing.  By all-white police officers of the kind we all know so well.  

Our legal system is broken.  Thoroughly broken.  Leaders silently turn away.  The best way to stop discrimination is to stop discrimination says U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts with an absence of wisdom.

It was U.S. Supreme Court Anton Scalia who used the McCollum case as an example of why we should retain the death penalty.   

Our legal system is completely broken from top to bottom with no leadership and nobody held to account. 9/4/14  claurenpaulson 2014

Posted on Thursday, September 4, 2014 at 10:42AM by Registered CommenterLAUREN PAULSON | Comments11 Comments | References3 References