Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Was Clinton ever disbarred for practicing law

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
neuvocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 04:30 PM
Original message
Was Clinton ever disbarred for practicing law
in his own home state? Was he ever disbarred anywhere else? I'm trying to help settle an argument. Thanks for any help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PretzelWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think he was disbarred from practicing law for a period of time
I think he was only able to practice law in Arkansas and the disbarment had an expiration at which point he could be a lawyer again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Qutzupalotl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. 5 years, as I recall,
dated from his being found in contempt for providing misleading testimony...was that in 1999?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CDY Donating Member (75 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yes
Yes, but I cannot remember the details!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnabelLee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. This article has some details
He was also disbarred from practicing before the SC. :eyes:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/10/01/politics/main...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
5. No - but he agreed to not practice law for 5 years, and that end of his
Edited on Wed Jul-09-03 02:34 PM by papau
ability to practice in Ark meant he could not practive in front of the USSC.

If he wanted to practice again after 5 years he just applies in Ark - no problem - and applies to the USSC - and is also unlikely to have a problem.

But the media would go nuts. They do not understand the term disbar. He is not disbarred from the practice of law. He is not disbarred in Ark. His lic is suspended in Ark. If he is admitted to other state courts he may be OK to practice in those state courts. Likewise as to Federal Courts. The USSC is a simple 5 year good behavior in your home state and is almost automatic as to admission after completion of the 5 years - a BIG HONOR - not! So April 2011 he should be back in business everywhere including the USSC - if he wants to.

He was not found in "contempt" or convicted of perjury (the special counsel said there was no case on the perjury given the matter was not material to any case to begin with ) for providing misleading testimony, but was fined from the bench for providing misleading testimony, and agreed to a 5 year suspension of his lic in Ark to end an ethics case there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. He was disbarred from practicing before the Supreme Court
His Arkansas law license was also suspended for five years. I'm not certain if President Clinton ever appealed these decisions. I believe the SCOTUS decision took place in October of 2001 and the Arkansas decision in April 2001, but don't quote me on that. :-)

Here's an older article from ABCNews.com regarding his bogus SCOTUS disbarring:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/scotus01100...

Excerpt:

The Supreme Court today suspended Clinton from practicing law before the high court and gave him 40 days to say why he should not be permanently disbarred.

The order likely means Clinton could not argue a case before the high court should he ever return to private law practice. Most lawyers who are admitted to the Supreme Court bar never actually argue a case there, but the right to do so is considered an honor.

The court did not explain its reasons, but Supreme Court disbarment often follows disbarment in lower courts. The court acted after it was notified by the Arkansas Supreme Court that Clinton's Arkansas law license was suspended for five years and he paid a $25,000 fine. The Arkansas suspension took effect in April.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
7. Yes and no.
He was never technically disbarred. As part of a settlement to stop prosecution--a plea bargain--he agreed to have his license suspended for a few years.

Technically, no court ever brought him to trial, convicted him of anything and then disbarred him. This is important.

It is accepted within the law that although settlements may be viewed as admission of guilt, they are not an admission or finding of anything.

Similarly, he has never been convicted of perjury, and frankly, although it's obvious he misled, since nobody ever defined "sexual relations", it's quite legitimate that short of intercourse, one could quibble and say "no" to the question. Republicans don't understand this because they can't get a blow job except through threats or ready money, whereas for many of us lefties, a slurp is often much easier from a woman who may like you, want to have some fun too, but may not want to "go all the way".

So, since you're arguing against a bonehead, you are correct and he/she/it is wrong: nobody ever "took away his license" and he was never "disbarred". He agreed to have it suspended to save himself and the courts trouble and money.

Now Poindexter WAS convicted on five or six felonies before a technicality overturned them. (There was no doubt about the guilt, but the proof could only be obtained from sealed proceedings.) Oliver North was convicted, but pardoned. It was never overturned or anything, he was found guilty.

Remember "the sleaze factor"? That was the Reagan Administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. If I could write better, I'd have written your post - Well said. :-)
:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
republicansareevil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. I thought they DID define "sexual relations"...
I thought the Court determined before his deposition (or whatever it was) that "sex" meant sexual intercourse? I thought that was part of the process that the lawyers agree on what terms mean ahead of time. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meatloaf Donating Member (605 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
9. NO!!!!!!
It may have already been stated, but as part of a settlement, Clinton agreed to his Arkansas Law license being suspended for 5 years. He then personally withdrew from the USSC Bar association.

He has to wait a few years, I forget how many, after he regains his Arkansas license before reapplying to the USSC Bar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 14th 2014, 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC