Social South Carolina Supreme Court Suspends Attorney For George Floyd Comments.

[BEER]

What I personally do is sue in federal court to have the discipline removed and to have the ethics code enjoined as a prior restraint on free speech. I have no idea what this guy is going to do but I hope he does something along that lines

So it's not an ethics breach for a sitting judge to make character remarks on a citizen killed by police?

Not being snarky, btw. Genuinely curious.

 

[The HAMA]

People on here saying it's unconstitutional are the same ones that say talk shit get hit. So which one is it guys? Make up your fuckin minds for fucks sake.

Most on here have no fuckin idea.

 

[Lord Coke]

So it's not an ethics breach for a sitting judge to make character remarks on a citizen killed by police?

Not being snarky, btw. Genuinely curious.

I was talking about the code governing lawyers not the code for judicial ethics.

However, if you want a serious answer regarding a judge in a similar situation, Yes it is a ethics breech. If you were to sue over the ethics breech under a first amendment theory you would likely lose..A prior restraint is subject to strict scrutiny. In light of the fact there is countervailing constitutional obligation of the courts to not show bias the code for judges would likely get upheld as constitutional because there is a compelling government interest in unbiased judges and chilling their speech even outside of work is the most narrowly tailored way to achieve that interest.

 

[A-Level Wrestler]

Who cares if its ugly, thats what freedom of speech is about. Blacks can call whites anything they want too. You have 2 options, freedom of speech or censorship. The moment you back down on the first freedom of speech word, its only a domino effect from there onwards with constantly shifting goal posts as people get more sensitive (because they're protected from bad words).

 

[JOE QUEEF]

So it's not an ethics breach for a sitting judge to make character remarks on a citizen killed by police?

Of course it is. Judges "should avoid even the appearance of impropriety".

But that doesn't win elections or secure higher appointments.

And they take care of each other, unless it behooves them to stab a colleague in the back for personal gain.

 

[BEER]

I was talking about the code governing lawyers not the code for judicial ethics.
However, if you want a serious answer regarding a judge in a similar situation, a prior restraint is subject to strict scrutiny. In like of the fact there is countervailing constitutional obligation of the courts to not show bias the code for judges would likely get upheld as constitutional because there is a compelling government interest in unbiased judges and chilling their speech even outside of work is the most narrowly tailored way to achieve that interest.

Man I'm too drunk for this.

Explain it to me as though I was five years old.

 

[Lord Coke]

Man I'm too drunk for this.

Explain it to me as though I was five years old.

Yes it is a ethics breech. If a judge were to sue the bar over enforcement of the ethics breech under a first amendment theory he would likely lose. That is because the government has to survive something called strict scrutiny to censor someone's speech. The government has a compelling government interest in judges not being biased unlike a lawyer in private practice like the one in the OP. So the government would survive the test for censoring people's speech.

 

[Graves The Elder]

last time I was in SC, Columbia to be exact the Capitol building had two flags.
One was Old Glory, the other was the Confederate Flag.
Now, they all high and mighty?
Sheeit, son.

 

[BEER]

Yes it is a ethics breech. If a judge were to sue the bar over enforcement of the ethics breech under a first amendment theory he would likely lose. That is because the government has to survive something called strict scrutiny to censor someone's speech. The government has a compelling government interest in judges not being biased unlike a lawyer in private practice like the one in the OP. So the government would survive the test for censoring people's speech.

I don't think a five year old would understand that, but you're saying that the attorney was in the wrong and duly dismissed from duty?

 

[KING BONES]

This is what happens when you accept political correctness.

The moment whites were scared to say the N-word, it was only a matter of time before it snowballed into this.

The goal posts always move, once you allow other people to control your speech. Even on this forum you cant say the N-word, which breaches the first amendment.

a beacon of light in a world of darkness

 

[KING BONES]

People on here saying it's unconstitutional are the same ones that say talk shit get hit. So which one is it guys? Make up your fuckin minds for fucks sake.

Most on here have no fuckin idea.

there's grey area

going with unconstitutional

 

[Lord Coke]

I don't think a five year old would understand that, but you're saying that the attorney was in the wrong and duly dismissed from duty?

No you gave me a hypothetical about a judge and I showed you why that is different than the lawyer at issue in the OP.
BEER I believe

 

[BEER]

No you gave me a hypothetical about a judge and I showed you why that is different than the lawyer at issue in the OP.
BEER I believe

Nah, not trolling.

Genuinely asking questions because I didn't go to law school.

 

[The HAMA]

there's grey area

going with unconstitutional

You just picked a side dude. You are not in the grey area.

Like I said... Most on here have no idea!

You just proved my point. Thanks

 

[Lord Coke]

Nah, not trolling.

Genuinely asking questions because I didn't go to law school.

Oh I'm sorry I thought you were a lawyer. For some reason I thought I read that awhile back. My memory must be getting bad.

 

[BEER]

Oh I'm sorry I thought you were a lawyer. For someone reason I thought I read that years ago.

You got the wrong guy. I didn't even graduate high school.

 

[Hadron90]

People on here saying it's unconstitutional are the same ones that say talk shit get hit. So which one is it guys? Make up your fuckin minds for fucks sake.

Most on here have no fuckin idea.

I made up my mind. Its unconstitutional. Next question.

 

[The HAMA]

I made up my mind. Its unconstitutional. Next question.

OKKK man!

 

[JimmyFresno]

He's not wrong. George Floyd should not have seen the light of day after robbing a pregnant woman at gun point.

George Floyd was a shit-stain in the underwear of society. So is Derek Chauvin, his murderer.

 

[KING BONES]

You just picked a side dude. You are not in the grey area.

Like I said... Most on here have no idea!

You just proved my point. Thanks

i didn't pick a side...i picked a shade...a shade of grey

point still has not been proved. Welcome