Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 708, Hale petitioned the Illinois Supreme Court to reconsider the Committee's denial.
#Matthew hale professional
The Hearing Panel was also concerned about Hale's refusal to repudiate a 1995 letter he wrote in response to published commentary in support of affirmative action, in which Hale referred to the female author's "rape at the hands of a nigger beast." The letter, the Hearing Panel found, was insulting, inappropriate, and showed a "monumental lack of sound judgment" that would put Hale "on a collision course with the Rules of Professional Conduct." Finally, the Hearing Panel concluded that Hale was not candid and open with it during the hearing. First, the Hearing Panel believed that Hale's outspoken intent to continue discriminating in his private life, especially taken together with negative character evidence such as academic probation, an order of protection, and a list of arrests (not convictions), was inconsistent with the Rules of Professional Conduct. Hale possesses the requisite character and fitness for admission for the practice of law." The Hearing Panel based its decision that Hale had not satisfied his burden of proving that he possessed the requisite character and fitness on several findings. It began by drawing a distinction between Hale's First Amendment right to express ideas and his right to become a member of the Illinois bar, commenting that the case was "not about Mr. On June 30, 1999, the Hearing Panel denied Hale's application. Bearing in mind the unique procedures that the Illinois Supreme Court uses for bar admission decisions (as opposed to its review of litigated cases), we find that Hale has had his day in the state courts, and that the district court correctly dismissed his suit. This time he lost because the district court concluded, in part, that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine did not permit it to review the earlier decision of the Illinois Supreme Court. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois with a fresh lawsuit again raising his First Amendment claim, among other constitutional challenges. Unsuccessful in that effort, he then turned to the U.S. Hale challenged that determination both before the Illinois Supreme Court and then the Supreme Court of the United States, claiming among other things that the Committee had violated his First Amendment rights by acting solely on the basis of his viewpoints.
His defeat came at the hands of the Committee on Character and Fitness (Committee) appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court, which found him unfit to practice law. Hale succeeded in satisfying the first of these hurdles, but not the second. The Illinois State Bar requires applicants not only to demonstrate proficiency in the law on a written bar examination, but also to pass a character and fitness exam. He comes before us today because he seeks to be admitted to practice law in the state of Illinois. Matthew Hale is a public advocate of white supremacy and the leader of an organization (formerly called the World Church of the Creator 1 ) dedicated to racism and anti-Semitism.
0 kommentar(er)
