Pro Se litigants:

"Deprived of life, liberty or property without due process."
Judges:

"Refuse to operate within the law and provide fair procedures".
ACCESS TO JUSTICE

Access to justice has eroded. Pro Se litigants are discouraged and denied rights with the intent to sabotage pro se litigants access to justice. These biases exists in direct contradiction to the Supreme Court ruling in Faretta v. California; "that everyone has the constitutional right to proceed without counsel".

Olmstad v. United States, (1928) 277 U.S. 438
"Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites everyone to become a law unto himself, it invites anarchy".

Saturday, January 4, 2014

Maryland Courts in Montgomery County

Access to Justice

The Court of Public Opinion/ the voiceless
"50 million Americans qualify for federally funding civil legal aid, yet more than half of those who seek help are turned away due to lack of resources" (legal aid and pro bono lawyers)


"Access to Justice"  is eroded in Montgomery County, Maryland judicial system especially towards pro se litigants. Powers to be -the government became a "rubber stamp institution' (accepted these behaviors) refusing to hold Judges, government and court officials accountable for their actions. In addition, ignoring the root causes of disparity issues in Montgomery county without applying a comprehensive social, economic or political strategy to combat these long-term problems. These actions impacts the political and social destabilization in the region, such as violating human and civil rights, unsustainable social and economic development that causes divisions in society and political systems.

According to the Department of Justice (Access to Justice Initiatives), millions of people can't get assistance due to systematic discrimination that takes hold in judicial procedures and understands that inequities shouldn't be tolerated. For example, promoting barriers and accessibility towards individuals who are experiencing financial barriers to exercise their rights, ensuring fairness, delivering fair and just outcomes and respect from the justice system in Montgomery County. In 2008, Chief Judge Robert Bell of the Court of Appeals of Maryland established Maryland Access to Justice Commission to reduce these barriers. In 2002, an Anti- Bias commission was created to examine the racial, gender and ethical bias that negatively impacted on the Maryland judicial system. In 2014, these barriers haven't decrease the numbers equally however demonstrates consistent disparity which remain a crisis situation in Montgomery County, Maryland.

Montgomery county is one of the tenth wealthiest counties in the nation, highest disparity and inequality (social economic issues) historically, however suppressed (Reference disparity statistics below). In 2002, the Court of Appeals of Maryland implemented an administrative order creating anti-bias commission on gender equality to ensure that gender, racial and ethnic fairness don't have a negative impact in the Maryland judicial system. The comprehensive report is a study designed to measure the changes in attitudes, experiences and perceptions towards these biases. "Social neglect and abandonment of indigenous, brown and black people have been perpetuated through the institutionalized legality of unfair treatment. More aggressive measures and policies are implemented to deny rights to those who are a the bottom of the social and economic barrel". The rights for equality, equity and justice for all is a myth however oppressed in Montgomery County, Maryland.

The Issues/Barriers
A pro se litigant is negatively characterized, discouraged and denied rights  Judges comments reflect a distinct anti-pro se litigant sentiment. Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905 "... the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws."

The Courts are bias against pro se litigants in procedural requirements that are intentionally difficult. "Pro se pleadings are to be considered without the regard to technicality; pro se pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers" Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959). Judges and court officials are rude and disrespectful, only to discourage the rights of pro se litigants. "Judges have duty under Canon 3 to "be patient, dignified and courteous towards litigants and the right to be heard according to the law. "The fifth amendment states that no one shall be " deprived of life, liberty or property without the due process of law".

Court clerks withhold information from pro se litigants, stereotype and stigmatized and maliciously advised litigants with wrong information. Clerks manipulate records and documents are constantly lost there is no accountability to these actions. Canon 3 'Judges has a duty to assure that court officials "refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice in the performance of their official duties" (Canon 3 Section 2) suggests a duty upon judges, especially administrative judges, to assure their court staff provide assistance in an impartial manner.

The Courts provide a self-help window which it's no guarantee of any help. They look angry, attitudes and responses are rude as if you disturbing them when it's part of their job to serve the public. This is just a tactic to block judicial access to common citizens.

Law libraries are financed by filing fees by pro se litigants ( some states) however they are at the convenience for lawyers. If you are a minority some clerks automatic assume you are a defendant in a criminal case before asking, May I help you"? Instead they ask, "Are you a defendant for a criminal case"?

Montgomery County is culturally diverse, there are immigrants and second language citizens in this county. When they present their case, you can barely understand or comprehend their case. Hispanics has the advantage to be offered an interpreter and others, such as Asian, African and Indians, etc., don't have the same opportunity to be offered the same services for an interpreter made available to assist them. Cases are lost due to this sort of injustice and discriminatory practices. This practice is unconstitutional, every member in society deserves equal protection under the law. Maty v. Grasselii Chemical Company 303 U.S. 197 (1938) "Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end. Proper pleadings is important, but its importance consists in effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment".

The matter of public opinion and 1st Amendment rights aren't a guarantee - To openly speak on these topics of disparity, injustice and civil rights- you are retaliated and threatened in various ways that attributes and create a totalitarian oppressed system. This includes the access to media (freedom of the press) which is regulated on the basis of conformity to the government and non-conformity with "official" public opinion. This results to a "forcible consensus" not a democratic system of government but an anarchy. The problem is the government exclude the public access and don't have the ability to design a political system to limit corruption. In addition, can't rid their own personal biases to produce a comprehensive plan to improve public trust that deeply colors the way the public negatively views politics. "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional rights". Sherar v. Cullen, 481F. 2d 946 (1973).

The founding fathers tirelessly tried to repair the problem of corruption; their ideas of  this "disease of corruption" range from moral and ethical values featuring the legal and political systems. Now that the disease has surfaced, the constitution and laws needs to reformed and redesigned. The Constitution- fifth amendment states that no one shall be "deprived of life liberty of property without due process of law". The Equal Protection clause stretched with the promise that before depriving a citizen of life, liberty or property, the government must follow fair procedures. Action denying the process that is "due" is unconstitutional and the erosion of civil liberties.








References :
View links (below)

Unfinished Business - Disparity in Montgomery County
https://drive.google.com/?tab=jo&authuser=0#my-drive

Traffic Stops in Montgomery County
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6WA87wzHgSVVnNZaUJRZzJNUWM/edit


Department of Justice "Access to Justice"

Maryland Courts on Racial and Gender Bias
http://www.msba.org/departments/commpubl/press_ctr/pressrel/2001/pr10-29-2001.asp

Montgomery County Achievement Gap
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6WA87wzHgSVUW1saVRhei1SZEU/edit

Montgomery County MOA Department of Justice /MCPD engage in racially discriminatory conduct
http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/cor/Pubs/mcagrmt.php#COMPLAINT AND INVESTIGATION PROCESS

No comments:

Post a Comment