|The need for public opinion to support the
removal of lawyers from elective office.1
The issue of the unfitness of lawyers for
elective office. The corruption of the legal
profession as a whole. ( Part 4 of 4).2
In Federalist 96 this writer
set himself the task of establishing to a
standard of proof of reasonable suspicion or
probable cause, that the legal profession was
materially more corrupt than the population as a
whole. That therefore the legal profession should
be excluded from elective office to avoid the
inevitable harm to the whole Nation that would
flow from control of government being in the
hands of its most corrupt profession. To make the
case both the rationalist (Federalist 97) and the
empirical approach (Federalists 98 & 99) were
used. Here is a summary of the evidence and the
conclusions that evidence supports.
The rational approach concluded
that all the factors that tend to create
corruption in a profession are present in the
legal profession in as powerful a mode as they
ever get for any profession. Thus the legal
profession can rationally be expected to be the
most corrupt in the land, and materially more so
than the average citizen. The empirical
approach provided the following evidence:
- Jesus Christ is quoted in the New
Testament as condemning the profession
and calling it corrupt.
- The Philosopher Plato called the
profession corrupt. International
literature, proverbs and sayings, all
speak of the profession as being corrupt.
- The criminologist Dr. Gary Green, states
that lawyers operate in an environment
that is criminogenic, i.e. that creates
- Books written by American lawyers
describe in detail just how extremely
corrupt the profession is.
- The record indicates that in all three
branches of government, the corruption of
the legal profession has reached alarming
proportions and very egregiously harms
- The American Bar Association 1993 survey
indicates that Americans who know lawyers
best trust them least.
- The corruption of the legal profession is
at such a high level, that it is
adversely affecting the psyche and well
being of large numbers of lawyers in
practice. So much so, that many honest
lawyers leave the profession in disgust,
at considerable financial sacrifice.
- The corruption is so severe that it is
blamed for both random and specific acts
of violence against lawyers.
- The profession's leadership recognizes to
a significant degree, how severe the
The significance of the absence of a
specific kind of evidence.
Proof of a proposition can sometimes be provided
by the absence of a particular kind of
evidence. Thus it is significant that there is no
material evidence of the widespread corruption of
any other legitimate profession. That reinforces
the concept that the legal profession is
materially more corrupt than any other. There is
not even evidence from other countries that their
legal profession is nearly as corrupt as that in
the United States. The foregoing is demonstrated
by the following absence of evidence:
- In his book 'Occupational Crime', Dr.
Gary Green found it necessary to address
only two of the 'respected professions',
the legal and the medical profession. He
found only the legal profession
'criminogenic', and had no
general condemnation of the medical
- This writer is unaware of a single work
by members of any other profession,
generally condemning their own profession
for widespread corrupt practices.
- This writer is unaware of any other free
world nation which perceives its legal
profession as even approaching the level
of corruption attained by their
colleagues in the United States.
- This writer is unaware of any other free
world nation in which citizen
organizations spring up spontaneously to
attempt to counter legal corruption.
- This writer is unaware of any free world
European nation, with as shameful a
history of corruption among its lawyers
legislators as has this one.
- The legal profession has provided no
material response to these accusations.
General conclusions as to the corruption
of the legal profession. The evidence
that both the legal profession as a whole, and a
substantial number of its members, are corrupt is
overwhelming. That conclusion is directly
supported by affirmative evidence and indirectly
supported by the absence of any material contrary
evidence. The original purpose of Federalists
97,98,99 and 100, was to discover whether there
was enough evidence to prove that the legal
profession was corrupt, to a standard of proof of
reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The
evidence supports the conclusion that the case
has been made to standards of proof exceeding
those goals. The evidence is reasonably
sufficient to have proved the case to the
standard of proof of preponderance of the
evidence to most readers, and even to the
standard of beyond a reasonable doubt to
some. Further conclusions as to the
corruption of the leadership of the legal
profession and of lawyer legislators.
Although the corruption of the legal profession
as a whole is now well established, it remains
true that the profession still contains many
individual members who have retained a high
measure of integrity. So the question now of
interest becomes: Is the legal profession's
leadership3 likely to be
more or less corrupt than the general membership?
Cream rises to the top of the milk, but
regrettably so does scum to the top of the
cesspool. Every group tends to promote to
positions of power within its own organizational
structure, those best able to advance its
selfish interests. In the army4
for example, those who do well must show a host
of universally admired qualities. These qualities
are: integrity, intelligence,
courage, daring, technical proficiency, loyalty,
calm under fire, leadership, flexibility,
physical prowess, good health, a stable
personality, an ability to work well with others,
and an ability to treat all according to the
content of their character not the color of their
skin. Those who rose to the top of their
profession had to have these qualities. The army
gave us General Marshal, General Bradley, General
Douglas Mac Arthur, General Dwight D. Eisenhower,
General Colin Powell, and General Schwartzkoff.
All men of the highest moral standing as well as
men of extreme competence.
At the other extreme are the criminal
organizations. There, advancement to the top also requires
particular qualities, many of which are universally condemned.
Organized crime groups 'qualities' include blind loyalty with
violations punishable by death; a willingness to do criminal acts
without question and to commit murder when asked. Further
'qualities' required are a complete absence of conscience and a
ruthless willingness to spread evil, misery and grief to all and
sundry in order to make a criminal profit. Here too it is those
who best exhibit the 'qualities' prized by the group who rise to
the top. Organized crime gave us Al Capone, Bugsy Malone, Lucky
Luciano, Albert Anastasia, the Gambino family and 'Dapper' Don
The legal profession like other organizations,
seeks to achieve the highest benefits for its members. Its criminogenic
occupational structure tends to bring it closer in organizational
objectives to criminal rather than legitimate organizations. When
the battle for the hearts and minds of the members is between
ethics and greed, greed often wins. Particularly in a profession
that has achieved almost absolute power over the Nation. To keep
and expand that power for the profit of the profession, no matter
what evil befalls others is what will help candidates for power
to reach the top. Thus those who show the greatest willingness to
do what is necessary to further the profession's greed, are
likely to rise to its leadership. That is best done by keeping
the Nation under the legal profession's tyrannical rule, while
vehemently denying that tyranny exists.
We can thus thank the legal profession for Mr.
Nixon, Mr. Spiro Agnew, Mr. John Mitchell, Mr. Ehrichman, Mr.
Kliendienst, Mr. Colson, Mr. Dan Rostenkowski, Mr. John Wright,
and now Mr. Bill Clinton and Mr. Al Gore to name only a few. The
last two may or may not face criminal charges. For the moment
there are investigations pending on matters potentially
implicating Mr. Clinton criminally on the Whitewater matter, as
well as potential new allegations of soliciting campaign funds
illegally against both the President and the Vice president.
The evidence shows that it is all but certain
that those who rise to the highest power in the legal profession,
are more likely to be corrupt than are their own rank and file.5
Since the levers of power are greatest in the federal government
in Washington D.C. the evidence indicates that those lawyers able
to reach elected office are also probably the most corrupt.6
The latest campaign finance scandals apparently tarring virtually
all politicians7 is a prime example of the corruption
of lawyers8 spreading to non-lawyers as a survival
The effect of the corruption of lawyers
on the judiciary.
The Nation is already unconstitutionally forced by the legal
profession to limit its choice of judges to their own ranks. It
is fortunate that the judges, once chosen, are generally less
subject to the levels of temptation that existed when they were
lawyers. So at least the Nation sees some relief there. It is
also true that even corrupt lawyers prefer honest judges. So the
judges chosen may well be more honest than those who chose them.
Sometimes dishonest lawyer politicians will seek to cloak
themselves with the good reputation of honest lawyers by
nominating them for judgeships. These factors mitigate some of
the harm to the Nation.
The harm to the Nation of electing
The usual consequences of having dishonest men in power is known.
They will enrich themselves illegally at the Nation's expense.
However the impact on the Nation of having its entire
government dominated by the single most corrupt group in the land
is mind boggling in its implications. Here are some of the
- The moral decline of the Nation starts with the
leadership. Thus the consistent presence of the most
corrupt group in the land as the Nation's leaders cannot
fail to cause the general decline in the moral and
ethical standards of the Nation. That has happened.
- The spread of corruption to non members of the legal
profession as a survival mechanism sometimes perceived as
the only way to get just results from an unjust system.9
- The United States is the most powerful Nation in the
World, and the cutting edge of democracy. It is a Nation
which needs to lead by example. Instead its world image
is one of a corrupt government and Nation. That
diminishes this Nation's ability to exercise the moral
authority that it's position of power and its history
- When the leaders of the Nation are corrupt, the message
to those who work for them is that it is OK to be
corrupt. All parents know that authority figures cannot
successfully teach children or subordinates to 'Do as I
say, not as I do!' So corruption spreads to otherwise
- Man's nature is selfish. Man needs to constantly fight
his nature to achieve his best. Every time a man does
something wrong it becomes a little easier to do wrong
again. Thus with corrupt leadership in power the decline
of the Nation's moral values and ethical standards can be
expected to continue apace. That has been happening.
The legal profession is unquestionably corrupt. The evidence
indicates lawyer legislators are probably even more corrupt than
are their colleagues. Their presence in elective office is
unconstitutional, morally destructive and harmful to the Nation
to the point where it will soon bring the Nation down.10
Their presence appears to force their non-lawyer colleagues into
corrupt practices merely to stay in government. The continual
flow of information on the corruption of the Nation's leaders
undermines confidence in government, leads to the disaffection of
most of the population and causes fringe groups to seek
revolutionary remedies. It is also the reason why the most
misguided believe in the use of domestic terrorism as an
instrument of change.11
Is there in the Nation any person with a soul
so bereft of decency as to knowingly condemn his country
to be governed by men and women selected from the most corrupt
group in the land? The answer for a free people must be a
resounding NO. Thus on the issue of corruption alone the evidence
is so strong that the Nation should see fit to remove all lawyers
from elective office at once. Of course the fact that those
lawyers are also unconstitutionally in office, makes the decision
About the author:
This writer is a constitutional scholar who wrote Federalists 86
through 99, in defense of the Constitution. He is like Madison, a
non lawyer and like Hamilton an immigrant and naturalized
- See Federalist 96 by this writer.
- This paper and Federalists 97, 98 and 99,
should be read as a single unit .
- The leadership of the profession consists
of those within the profession who exercise the most
power whether in one of the branches of government, in
academia, in financial circles, or anywhere else power is
- In this country the army's goals do not
differ materially from the Nation's.
- The evidence even suggests a direct
correlation between lawyers in power and their personal
level of corruption. The higher the level of power the
greater the probability of corruption.
- As in all things there are undoubtedly
exceptions to this rule. This blanket statement of
probability of corruption cannot be used to condemn any
- When the rules of the game are made,
interpreted and enforced by corrupt lawyers, it may not
be too far to say that even non lawyers wishing to run
for public office will be forced to accept corruption as
the price for getting elected, pay their own way like
billionaire Ross Perot, or stay home.
- A potential defense for very corrupt
lawyers is that the psychological dysfunction arising
from extreme cognitive dissonance (See Federalist
95) renders them incapable of distinguishing right from
wrong when the law clashes with their financial
interests. Some say that this defense is too close to the
much discredited 'insanity defense' and should not serve
as a defense at all. This writer believes the argument is
at least a factor favoring mitigation of punishment.
- The apparent acceptance by all members of
the justice system that policemen routinely lie under
oath to avoid the consequences of having their case
thrown out under the exclusionary rule, is one example.
- It is in the face of overwhelming evidence
and with a heavy heart that this writer asserts these
facts. Every American has an emotional investment in the
integrity of his government and his leaders. That is why
all citizens are diminished when they realize the kind of
leadership they themselves have put in place!
- Of which misguided number Timothy McVeigh,
convicted of bombing the Federal Building in Oklahoma
which killed 168 people in April 1995, is certainly the
worst offender to date.