This is about the May day melee in Los Angeles where a lot of protesters came to Mac Arthur Park to demand rights for latinos and illegal immigrants, and police cleared the park usind mild force after people refused to leave and some agitators threw bottles. I find it quite objectionnable that people who are not even supposed to be here (illegal immigrants) are allowed to gather and protest. But also what seems wrong is that I hear some are filing a lawsuit about police brutality etc I am not a lawyer but this seems frivolous, unethical and or possibly illegal. Can a lawyer be disbarred from doing this? Can a lawyer continue to work on the case if he learns the plaintiff is illegal? Anyone knows these law-ethics details?
If there is an issue, or possible issue, of police brutality then that transcends the immigration status of the plaintiffs. If the cops crossed the line and beat people then they violated the law and should be held accountable. The law doesn t differentiate between legal vs illegal immigrants. If you shoot and kill an illegal immigrant it s still considered murder. A lawyer can defend anyone, even if they know that the person committed a crime. What they can t do is go into court and commit perjury, tell the court that the person didn t actually do it.
If human rights have been violated, a lawyer could probably represent an illegal immigrant and win.
Yes. They are even allowed to represent blacks, whites, japaneese and any other eese physically present in the U.S. Citizenship or the lack thereof does not preclude legal rights from being granted.
A lawyer s ethical obligations are, first and foremost, to safeguard the interests and the information of his client. A lawyer can t make false statements to courts and can t make frivolous arguments in court, but if the police broke the law then a lawyer s argument in court that their client should recover from the city is not frivolous. If police officers use brutal force on non-violent protestors, it is entirely possible they have committed a crime, regardless of the immigration status of the victim. A lawyer can certainly keep working on a case if he learns his client is illegal--he could be disbarred for dropping a client because of their immigration status. Most states even encourage lawyers to work for free for those who cannot afford adequate legal representation--this seems like an example of that.
I hope not. do it right or stay your *** where you were. Aparently it couldn t be that bad if your not willing to take the measures to make sure you don t have to go back.
Under the 14th Amendment, a lawyer can represent an illegal immigrant.
OK. First of all, the laws of the United States, including those protecting the right to free speech and the right to not be beaten by police, apply to everyone, regardless of their legal citizenship status (assuming that they were all illegals, which they weren t, and that they were asked for their papers before they were hit by the police, which didn t happen). They had the right to protest, and to gather. They also have the right to representation by an attorney, regardless of status. Now, to answer your other questions, yes, there are laws that prevent attorneys from filing baseless and frivolous claims, and in extremely serious and obviously baseless situations, they could, in theory, be disbarred, or at least fined. But this would not be one of those situations. Police brutality is a serious issue, and this was caught on tape. Saying quot;they were illegal,quot; even if it were true of everyone who was injured by the police, is not a defense to hitting people as they try to obey police orders. There were a lot of cameras rolling at that demonstration, and many were aimed at cops who were hurting people as they tried to disperse. The cops were in the wrong, and if lawsuits were to be brought (which I m sure there are), then the protesters, regardless of legal status, would probably win.
