Saturday, August 15, 2009

Interlude 14. That Miscreant Bill Clinton

So an attorney disbarred for alleged dishonesty is trustworthy to represent the U.S. Government ("unofficially") in deals with a nuclear power, lives directly at stake. The public avoids deep confusion only by perceiving disbarment as an act of punishment, not mainly a judgment on character. (See reference to poll at The spectacle brings to fore a question kanBARoo court raised last year: Is Bill Clinton really unsuited to practice law because of (as we say in California) acts of moral turpitude? Or, as kanBARoo court argued, was the Clinton disbarment (technically a five-year suspension) the most dramatic example of state-bar-establishment overreaching, crossing the Supremacy Clause?

kanBARoo court discusses the Bill Clinton disbarment at:

(To defend Clinton against state-bar calumny is not to endorse his policies, such as his moralistic workfare measures.)


Anonymous said...

I didn't know Clinton was disbarred, I thought he received a five year suspension.

Stephen R. Diamond said...

Different jurisdictions don't use these terms consistently. In Arkansas (as in California) "disbarment" is effectively five-year suspension. Clinton avoided, in California terms, "permanent disbarment."