Abuse of power by NY court in suspending Giuliani's law license

 David Zukerman:

In an opinion replete with Trump Derangement Syndrome, a panel of five justices of the 19-member Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, First Department, have ordered the immediate suspension of Rudolph W. Giuliani from the practice of law, pending a disciplinary hearing where the former mayor of New York City will face disbarment.

The order was handed down on June 24.  It claimed that the former mayor made false statements about various voting irregularities — including phony absentee ballots, and voting by non-citizens and felons, and underage voters and deceased voters, in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona.

...

And where were these jurists the years of the "false statements" on "colluding with Putin, charges of mental instability, Ukraine-gate, and the like throughout Mr. Trump's years in office, statements clearly designed to cause loss of confidence in his leadership — which indeed did so, given his favorable poll numbers only in the 40s?

And what of the false statements in the anti-Trump press, just disclosed this month, that President Trump ordered the forcible clearing of Lafayette Square, June 1, 2020, so that he could have a photo op at vandalized St. John's Church?  Didn't those statements keep "reliable information" from the American people?

The screed continues: 

When those false statements are made by an attorney, it also erodes the public's confidence in the integrity of attorneys admitted to our bar and damages the profession's role as a crucial source of reliable information.

And what of "false statements" made about Mr. Trump, from Democrats in Congress who are New York attorneys, like Jerrold Nadler?  Who will bring a grievance against him, alleging his efforts to undermine public confidence in Mr. Trump?

This screed-cum-opinion, then, stripping away all pretense, tears down the wall separating the First Department from the political arena, as will be immediately evident from the following paragraph:

One only has to look at the ongoing present public discord over the 2020 election, which erupted into violence, insurrection and death on January 6, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol, to understand the extent of the damage that can be done when the public is misled by false information about the elections. The AGC [Attorney Grievance Committee] contends that respondent's misconduct directly inflamed tensions that bubbled over into the events of January 6, 2021 in this nation's Capitol. Respondent's response is that no causal nexus can be shown between his conduct and those events. We need not decide any issue of "causal nexus" to understand that the falsehoods themselves cause harm. This event only emphasizes the larger point that the broad dissemination of false statements, casting doubt on the legitimacy of thousands of validly cast votes, is corrosive to the public's trust in our most important democratic institutions.

Is this a mere obiter dictum (an incidental expression of a judge's personal opinion) — or a statement joining forces with The New York Times and the Democrat (and Liz Cheney) demagogues, hurling out the term "insurrection" as a "false statement" description of the events at the Capitol the afternoon of January 6, 2021?  It is about as rank and unseemly a statement as ever emerged from a judge's chambers.  And see how this opinion followed Biden's lead referring, so misleadingly, to "death" at the Capitol, January 6, 2021.  Who died, was killed, at the Capitol, January 6, 2021, other than the unarmed pro-Trump demonstrator Ashli Babbitt?  What confidence does this invidious partisan declaration leave in the minds of at least half the voting population, that justice is blind?

...

They were also assuming facts not in evidence.  The country will know more about the allegations made when election audits are completed.  This court jumped the shark and jumped to conclusions.  They appear to be trying to preempt the evidence that is currently being gathered.