\u201cI\u2019ll have [Mr. Humphrey] call you. And I\u2019ll make sure you get a check today or tomorrow.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m really in a pinch\u2014I will need it sent overnight.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cNo problem, Mr. Barron. It will be my pleasure.\u201d<\/p>\n
Humphrey never returned his call that day. But before noon the following day, a check for $4,500 arrived from Heart of America. Humphrey preferred to simply mail a check for the needed amount rather than answer a lawyer\u2019s follow-up questions about money. Peter was curious about all this, but he couldn\u2019t argue with the results.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
As we readers\u00a0know, Humphrey is raising hundreds of thousands of dollars using Gwen\u2019s\u00a0case as an ask, and giving Peter peanuts. Fun.<\/p>\n
Gail Willet was sent a copy of Peter\u2019s cert. She deliberated on whether to make any reply, but ultimately sent \u201ca short letter saying that they believed that the decision below had been correct and they saw no need to respond.\u201d That apparently suited Gail well.<\/p>\n
Willet liked the approach. Short, haughty, and confident.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Okay then. I though there style was competent<\/em>, but what do I know.<\/p>\nNow we turn to Stephen, who is back in D.C. working for Justice Rose.<\/p>\n
Stephen Stockton had been watching the docket like a hawk. He had commandeered a copy of the cert petition as soon as it was filed in the clerk\u2019s office. His plan was to offer to trade the case for another one with Justice Rose\u2019s other clerk. The case, being from his home town, would naturally hold a special interest for him, he would argue.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Is that special interest, or conflict<\/em> of interest?<\/p>\nStephen ended up drawing the case naturally though, so no need for the intrigue. Once he had the case, Stephen worked very hard at writing up the summary for the judge, because \u201cit would be very bad for him personally if the judge looked into the case and found his analysis to be deliberately misleading.\u201d Ya think? He geared his effort toward diminishing \u201cJustice Rose\u2019s natural interest in this kind of case.\u201d Farris gives us Stephen\u2019s introduction, which portrays the case as one that has interesting facts but ultimately deals with underlying issues that are\u00a0already well established by the Supreme Court\u2014namely, judicial immunity and etc.<\/p>\n
Will Justice Rose be fooled? Will he deny cert to the case?! I can tell you\u2019re all on the edges of your seat! What is going to happen next?!<\/em><\/p>\nJustice Rose is reviewing the cert petitions with his clerks. He picks up Landis.<\/p>\n
\u201cHmm. Interesting facts. I always like cases with interesting facts. But we can\u2019t go around pleasing ourselves, can we? We\u2019ve got a Supreme Court to run here. Doctrines to pronounce. Decisions to make. Protests to engender. Creating the fodder for the next election. Important stuff here. I can\u2019t just grant cert because the facts amuse me.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Well that\u2019s . . . peppy.<\/p>\n
Justice Rose notices that the case is from where Stephen is from. He asks Stephen if he knows any of the lawyers involved, and Stephen says he doesn\u2019t. \u201cThe case made news last summer while I was studying for the bar,\u201d he says, \u201cbut I have only seen the lawyers on TV.\u201d Stephen suddenly realizes he\u2019s let on that the case was enough of a big deal to make the news, but Justice Rose informs him that \u201cjust because a case makes news in Spokane doesn\u2019t mean it meets the criteria for Supreme Court review.\u201d<\/p>\n
At no point to Stephen let Justice Rose know his personal connection to one of the social workers involved. It seems like it would go badly for him if Justice Rose found this out later, because while Stephen wasn\u2019t asked directly, I\u2019m pretty sure Justice Rose wouldn\u2019t accept that as an excuse. Stephen is playing a dangerous game.<\/p>\n
Justice Rose sets the case aside at that, but luckily for Gwen, he takes his work home to read on his spare time. And this time, that included the Landis cert. He was initially not impressed, but then he got to the bit about \u201ca sitting federal judge going into a state office building with a computer expert and personally discovering tampered documents.\u201d That he finds very<\/em> interesting indeed. And then he notices \u201chis old acquaintance Charley French\u2019s name\u201d on the front of the cert. That gets his attention too, and Stephen\u2019s intrigues aside, Justice Rose\u00a0decides to argue that the Supreme Court should take the Landis case.<\/p>\nChief Justice Winston leads the meeting on February 3rd, when the Landis case will come up. Most of the back and forth is what you would expect. At one point, though, Winston shuts Justice Dowling down for pointing out that he wasn\u2019t on the case when LaHue v. Briscoe was decided (it\u2019s relevant to the Landis case) and that the outcome might be different today. Winston says that that\u2019s no reason to grant cert, and Dowling says: \u201cNo, Chief, you\u2019re right, I guess.\u201d Maybe I\u2019m completely out of the loop on Supreme Court protocol, but that seems odd.<\/p>\n
After brief discussion, they take a vote, and only three justices vote to take the case. They need four. But before it can be denied, one of the other justices\u2014Justice Swindon\u2014asks for another week to consider his vote\u2014he says he may want to vote yes, but he\u2019s not sure. So they table it.<\/p>\n
Justice Swindon, typical for a swing voter, suddenly became very popular. Rose, Stauffer, Dowling, Krause, and the Chief Justice each called and made appointments with his secretary for visits in the next three working days.<\/p>\n
He listened politely, even intently, to their arguments, but was noncommittal at the end of each conversation.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Stephen tries to talk to Swindon\u2019s clerks to figure out what Swindon is thinking, but he\u2019s unsuccessful in his attempt. The meeting when the case will come up again arrives, and Swindon says he\u2019s going to vote no<\/em>. But just as cert is about to be denied, this<\/em> happens.<\/p>\n\u201cOK. Cert denied will be the order,\u201d the Chief Justice said, smiling.<\/p>\n
\u201cChief?\u201d said Justice Gilbert, one of the two women justices. \u201cI heard about all the meetings you all were having with Justice Swindon, and I got intrigued with what all the fuss was about. So I went back and studied the case with interest. I\u2019m going to vote yes. So I guess that means \u2018Cert granted\u2019?\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Stephen finds out immediately and wants to call Donna, but no one is allowed to announce this until the following Monday at 10am (this meeting was held on a Friday).<\/p>\n
Any breach of security, if discovered, would cost him his job and brand him for life. He wanted to help, but Corliss wasn\u2019t worth the risk. And he had an interesting evening planned with the redhead from the Senate.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
I\u2019m going to hold everyone\u2019s reactions until next week, but I want to pause here to consider these three sentences.\u00a0Stephen decides not to tell Donna ahead of time about the cert decision, because the risk is too great, but he\u2019s already risked a lot to help her\u2014he would probably be fired by Justice Rose if Rose knew he\u2019d intentionally tried to keep him from choosing the case because the case involved his one-time fianc\u00e9. But he might also get in deeper ethical trouble, depending on what the rules are for things of that sort.<\/p>\n
But it\u2019s not just Stephen who has been willing to play fast and loose with ethics. Peter pursued Gwen while being her lawyer\u2014her charity<\/em> lawyer, no less.\u00a0Lawyers are not supposed to pursue their clients romantically, especially<\/em> when those clients are dependent on them the way Gwen was (she couldn\u2019t afford another lawyer). Once Gordon died Peter regretted that he\u2019d pursued Gwen only because he did so while her ex-husband was alive<\/em> and not because he\u2019d done so as her lawyer.<\/p>\nWhat\u2019s troubling here is that you can\u2019t use adherence to ethical guidelines to sort the good guys from the bad guys\u2014and it goes further than just Peter and Stephen. Donna strip-searched a screaming Casey and decided to open a case to get back at Gwen for calling her a witch and a Nazi. But Gwen packed her bags, donned dark glasses, and staked out the foster family\u2019s home intent on kidnapping Casey and going on the lam. That would have been a most unhealthy childhood for Casey, growing up in hiding.<\/p>\n
In the end, this book doesn\u2019t really have good guys and bad guys. It has a mottly collection of ethically compromised individuals with deep flaws. Ordinarily, I\u2019d say that makes for good writing. Books with unsullied good guys and unquestioningly bad guys tend to read as too simplistic. Books where every character is deeply flawed, while still\u00a0having various good points, are fascinating. The trouble is that that\u2019s not what Farris thinks he\u2019s writing. Oh sure, Farris thinks he\u2019s written Peter as flawed, but he\u2019s got what\u2019s a flaw and what\u2019s not all mixed up.<\/p>\n
The problem isn\u2019t that Farris pursued Gwen while Gordon was still alive, it\u2019s that he pursued her when he\u2019s her lawyer<\/em>. He also insisted on keeping the case and arguing it even though he knew<\/em> he was not a Constitutional lawyer\u2014a mistake that may cost him this case, unless he can convince the Supreme Court that several new arguments\u2014arguments he should have been making from the beginning\u2014are not actually new arguments. Farris has Peter go so far as to wonder whether\u00a0he committed malpractice<\/em> before having his mentor character assure him that no, he did not.<\/p>\nWhy has no one asked Peter why he didn\u2019t pass the case on to someone more experienced? Why has no one ever queried whether\u00a0he decided to keep the case even though he knew he wasn\u2019t well versed in this area of law simply because he wanted to stay in Gwen\u2019s life?<\/em>\u00a0And how is that really that different from Bill Walinski throwing the initial hearing so that he could carry on as Gwen\u2019s lawyer and get in her pants?<\/p>\nI\u2019ll leave you to muse on that and make predictions about how Donna is going to respond when Stephen calls her on Monday after the news is released.<\/p>\n
I have a <\/b>Patreon<\/b><\/a>! Please support my writing!<\/b><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Stephen decides not to tell Donna ahead of time about the cert decision, because the risk is too great, but he’s already risked a lot to help her—he would probably be fired by Justice Rose if Rose knew he’d intentionally tried to keep him from choosing the case because the case involved his one-time fianc\u00e9. But he might also get in deeper ethical trouble, depending on what the rules are for things of that sort. But it’s not just Stephen who has been willing to play fast and loose with ethics.<\/p>\n
Click through to read more!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":845,"featured_media":31008,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[469],"class_list":["post-31007","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-anonymous-tip"],"yoast_head":"\n
Anonymous Tip: About That Cert Petition<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Stephen decides not to tell Donna ahead of time about the cert decision, because the risk is too great, but he's already risked a lot to help her---he would probably be fired by Justice Rose if Rose knew he'd intentionally tried to keep him from choosing the case because the case involved his one-time fianc\u00e9. But he might also get in deeper ethical trouble, depending on what the rules are for things of that sort. But it's not just Stephen who has been willing to play fast and loose with ethics. Click through to read more!\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anonymous Tip: About That Cert Petition\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Stephen decides not to tell Donna ahead of time about the cert decision, because the risk is too great, but he's already risked a lot to help her---he would probably be fired by Justice Rose if Rose knew he'd intentionally tried to keep him from choosing the case because the case involved his one-time fianc\u00e9. But he might also get in deeper ethical trouble, depending on what the rules are for things of that sort. But it's not just Stephen who has been willing to play fast and loose with ethics. Click through to read more!\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Love, Joy, Feminism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-11-18T13:39:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/166\/2016\/11\/interior-design-828545_1280.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"768\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"432\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Libby Anne\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Libby Anne\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html\",\"name\":\"Anonymous Tip: About That Cert Petition\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2016-11-18T13:39:06+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-18T13:39:06+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#\/schema\/person\/fae465c1bbb5cbdf26c9e73bfd1b73d2\"},\"description\":\"Stephen decides not to tell Donna ahead of time about the cert decision, because the risk is too great, but he's already risked a lot to help her---he would probably be fired by Justice Rose if Rose knew he'd intentionally tried to keep him from choosing the case because the case involved his one-time fianc\u00e9. But he might also get in deeper ethical trouble, depending on what the rules are for things of that sort. But it's not just Stephen who has been willing to play fast and loose with ethics. Click through to read more!\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anonymous Tip: About That Cert Petition\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/\",\"name\":\"Love, Joy, Feminism\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#\/schema\/person\/fae465c1bbb5cbdf26c9e73bfd1b73d2\",\"name\":\"Libby Anne\",\"description\":\"Libby Anne grew up in a large evangelical homeschool family highly involved in the Christian Right. College turned her world upside down, and she is today an atheist, a feminist, and a progressive. She blogs about leaving religion, her experience with the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements, the detrimental effects of the \\\"purity culture,\\\" the contradictions of conservative politics, and the importance of feminism.\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/author\/libby\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Anonymous Tip: About That Cert Petition","description":"Stephen decides not to tell Donna ahead of time about the cert decision, because the risk is too great, but he's already risked a lot to help her---he would probably be fired by Justice Rose if Rose knew he'd intentionally tried to keep him from choosing the case because the case involved his one-time fianc\u00e9. But he might also get in deeper ethical trouble, depending on what the rules are for things of that sort. But it's not just Stephen who has been willing to play fast and loose with ethics. Click through to read more!","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anonymous Tip: About That Cert Petition","og_description":"Stephen decides not to tell Donna ahead of time about the cert decision, because the risk is too great, but he's already risked a lot to help her---he would probably be fired by Justice Rose if Rose knew he'd intentionally tried to keep him from choosing the case because the case involved his one-time fianc\u00e9. But he might also get in deeper ethical trouble, depending on what the rules are for things of that sort. But it's not just Stephen who has been willing to play fast and loose with ethics. Click through to read more!","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html","og_site_name":"Love, Joy, Feminism","article_published_time":"2016-11-18T13:39:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":768,"height":432,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/166\/2016\/11\/interior-design-828545_1280.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Libby Anne","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Libby Anne","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html","name":"Anonymous Tip: About That Cert Petition","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#website"},"datePublished":"2016-11-18T13:39:06+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-18T13:39:06+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#\/schema\/person\/fae465c1bbb5cbdf26c9e73bfd1b73d2"},"description":"Stephen decides not to tell Donna ahead of time about the cert decision, because the risk is too great, but he's already risked a lot to help her---he would probably be fired by Justice Rose if Rose knew he'd intentionally tried to keep him from choosing the case because the case involved his one-time fianc\u00e9. But he might also get in deeper ethical trouble, depending on what the rules are for things of that sort. But it's not just Stephen who has been willing to play fast and loose with ethics. Click through to read more!","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/2016\/11\/anonymous-tip-about-that-cert-petition.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anonymous Tip: About That Cert Petition"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/","name":"Love, Joy, Feminism","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/#\/schema\/person\/fae465c1bbb5cbdf26c9e73bfd1b73d2","name":"Libby Anne","description":"Libby Anne grew up in a large evangelical homeschool family highly involved in the Christian Right. College turned her world upside down, and she is today an atheist, a feminist, and a progressive. She blogs about leaving religion, her experience with the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements, the detrimental effects of the \"purity culture,\" the contradictions of conservative politics, and the importance of feminism.","sameAs":["http:\/\/patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/author\/libby"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31007","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/845"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31007"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31007\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/31008"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31007"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31007"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/lovejoyfeminism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31007"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}