Just as Obama vows to ignore federal law, the California State Bar vows to ignore state law

In ordinary times, criminals disregard the law.  In the PC Obama era, however, elected officials and state government agencies don’t have much use for the law either.  Take Obama, for example.  Contrary to the original headlines regarding Obama’s newly discovered immigration rights, Obama’s recent announcement regarding illegal immigration isn’t an executive order.  Instead, it’s simply an abandonment of his executive responsibilities, insofar as he has now publicly announced that he refuses to enforce the laws that the legislative branch has passed.  He’s still King Obama, taking the law in his own hands but, instead of making the law, he’s breaking the law.

It turns out that, in Obama’s America, the federal executive branch is not the only government agency that has no use for explicit laws.  In California, the State Bar is vigorously arguing that it doesn’t need no stinkin’ laws either.  Let’s begin this discussion with the law itself.

Under California law (Calif. Bus. & Prof. Code sec. 6068), a licensed attorney is obligated to support both federal and state laws:

It is the duty of an attorney do to all of the following:

(a) To support the Constitution and laws of the United States and of this state.

Attorneys cannot plead ignorance of this requirement, as they must expressly state this obligation as part of the oath of office they take as a prerequisite to becoming fully licensed (Calif. Bus. & Prof. Code sec. 6067):

I solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of an attorney and counselor at law to the best of my knowledge and ability.

Put simply, California requires that, to practice as an attorney, the licensee must orally and explicitly promise that he or she will to support, not break, either state or federal law.

With this in mind, how in the world can the State Bar of California argue that an illegal immigrant should become a licensed attorney?  Shouldn’t both the Bar’s and the newly licensed attorney’s first obligation be to turn the attorney in for violating explicit federal immigration laws?

An illegal immigrant who passes the bar exam and demonstrates good moral character should be eligible to practice law, the State Bar has declared in a court filing.

The bar, which oversees California’s 225,000 lawyers, told the state Supreme Court on Monday that federal law leaves regulation of the legal profession largely up to the states and does not appear to prohibit Sergio C. Garcia, 35, of Chico from obtaining an attorney’s license.


The court cited two federal laws as potential obstacles. One prohibits illegal immigrants from receiving any “state or local public benefit,” including a professional license provided by a “state agency.” The other prohibits employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.

In Monday’s filing, the bar said the first law doesn’t apply because the court is a branch of state government, not a “state agency.” In 1995, the bar noted, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal courts aren’t government agencies.


“There is no reason to believe he cannot take the oath and faithfully uphold his duties as an attorney,” the bar said. It said the policy considerations are similar to those the California court addressed in 1972, when it declared unconstitutional a state law requiring attorneys to be U.S. citizens.

It’s pure sophistry to say that the federal laws don’t apply just because the California court system is a self-regulated branch of state government.  This argument ignores entirely the fact that California’s own law, which does indeed govern, imposes upon attorneys the obligation to support the Constitution.  The Constitution, in turn, is the umbrella for federal legislation.  The same sophistry holds true when it comes to comparing legal immigrants, who have not violated any laws on their way into the country, with illegal immigrants, whose very presence is an offense to law.

What’s going on here is open-and-above-board, so it’s we’re not concerned here with ordinary “cash corruption.”  That is, this is not a situation in which a private citizen makes a payment to a government official in return for the latter’s promise to look the other way.

What we have here is worse.  We are witnessing a profound ethical corruption that sees public institutions deliberately flouting their own laws.  This is a dangerous slippery slope.  Once the reliability of law is gone, the only thing left is despotism or anarchy, with the former being the tyranny of an individual or group and the latter being the tyranny of the mob.  When political officials expressly ignore the law, they are no better than ordinary criminals.  What’s being stolen, though, is more valuable than money or jewels.  It’s the essence of our liberty.


Be Sociable, Share!
  • Danny Lemieux

    Sooo third world! 

  • MacG

    Book, Book , Book ya gotta go Bill Clinton on this as it is right there in the oath “…faithfully discharge the duties of an attorney…”

    Discharge, dismiss, to unload or empty etc.  While I know the original language means to carry out their sworn duites however in this day and age of evolving words and lack of absolutes you can”t prove that is what it means…becasue they say so. oy.

  • Libby

    Why do they need a license to practice law if they don’t need the proper “documentation” to be a citizen?
    Just let anyone practice law as an “undocumented lawyer” so that they can do the work that American lawyers won’t do.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Libby, now that’s how you fight back in a guerilla insurgency. Hit them with their own weapons and rules.

  • http://furtheradventuresofindigored.blogspot.com/ Indigo Red

    Not just California, but Florida and New York are questioning State Bar requirements that never considered the possibility that the foreigner would have actually lived illegally and studied law in the US. 

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar


    When I said that the Leftist alliance is more powerful than people realize, this was not precisely what I meant but it is close. Tim Larkin is now banned from entering the UK. Reason? Can’t have the uppity serfs and slaves being given power to kill their masters, now can we.

    And here in the US, whe n Isaid the Leftist alliance is a bunch of evil fers that need to be annihilated, I wasn’t kidding either. If 50% of the bureaucracy in the UK can be wiped out and the solution is only going to start there, then in the US we might need a 25% total purge.

  • Danny Lemieux

    But, but, but…it’s a LIVING constitution.

  • lee

    I think, and as I write this, I also think they are wrong, but I think they equate these laws concerning illegal aliens as something akin to the Nuremburg laws, and they are, they THINK just ignoring what they consider “illegal” laws. They are IDIOTS. We already have about the MOST liberal immgration laws IN THE WORLD. Compare ours to, oh, say, Mexico. 

    What these liberal nut jobs fail to realize is there are all sorts of OTHER illegal things tied into illegal immigration. They have this image of those warning signs along the freeway down near San Diego–poor little Mexican family just running north for a better life. But the reality is that there are organized criminals who work illegal immigration by extorting money from their victims; they help run in soldiers who work for them, and who wil. work for them still, once in the US; they are involvved in human trafficking–it is much easier to hide trafficked humans inside a whole truckload of other illegal immigrants.
     If the lefty jack asses weren’t so free and easy with illegal immigrants, we could open our doors more easily to those poster children they love so much. And those poster children, the poor little family dashing across the freeway on that warning sign, could gain LEGAL access, more cheaply, without singing over their life savings to organized crime, and be able to pack up their belongings and bring them along. Every time we grant amnesties, we are not just rewarding illegal aliens for doing something against the law, but we are rewarding the criminals who exploit them, and who exploit our country, and the criminals who are involved in human trafficking.
    And illegal aliens are just smuggled in from Mexicao and Latin America, but also from China and Eastern Europe. 


    Illegal immigrant lawyers! What’s next judges? Juries?

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    “If the lefty jack asses weren’t so free and easy with illegal immigrants, we could open our doors more easily to those poster children they love so much. And those poster children, the poor little family dashing across the freeway on that warning sign, could gain LEGAL access, more cheaply, without singing over their life savings to organized crime, and be able to pack up their belongings and bring them along.”

    What made you think the Left wants immigrants to be legalized and protected by the law? Are you under the impression the Left respects the rule of law and the US Constitution? They don’t respect it. In fact, they are planning to destroy it, because those things are in their way to Utopia.

    If the Left’s plans end up with immigrants being denied legal access because of Leftist actions… that’s a feature, not a bug. Who do you think is allied to those self same “organized crims”? It starts with a D.


  • http://furtheradventuresofindigored.blogspot.com/ Indigo Red

    Illegal immigrant lawyers! What’s next judges? Juries?

    Even illegals, Sadie, are entitled to a fair trial before a jury of their peers – 12 honest, hard working illegal immigrants.


    Indeed, Indigo Red. I am sure that once the way is cleared for illegal immigrants, it’s only a matter of moments before sharia courts can demand equal justice for their own.

  • Pingback: California Bar: illegal immigrant should be admitted to practice - Overlawyered()