TheAgitator.com
Con Law for Nurse Legislators
Wednesday, April 23rd, 2008Tennessee Sen. Rosalind Kurita has an idea:
Defense attorneys would be banned from advertising their expertise with drunken driving cases under a bill advancing in the Senate.
Sen. Rosalind Kurita, a Clarksville Democrat, successfully added the provision to a bill that would create an online registry of repeat DUI offenders in Tennessee.
Kurita says officials have a hard enough time convicting drunken drivers without lawyers advertising their expertise in the field and offering discounts to DUI defendants.
Hat tip to Rick Davis.
Do they have a hard time convicting drunk drivers? Around my parts, first-timers plea to reckless driving, get their license suspended for 6 months, and don’t usually get in trouble for it again. Anybody with prior records that was caught red-handed gets the book thrown at them.
Besides, if it’s convictions they’re after, why not ban lawyers in general and prevent people from speaking in their own defense in court. Boom, free victory for the prosecution.
I guess that whole due process thing bugs the legislature when it comes to DUIs.
… wait, they have a hard time convicting DUI offenders, so they’re trying to make it more likely for defendants to have less competent attorneys?
Wow.
A ban on advertising a perfectly legal product or service? Why not ban them from advertising their expertise in criminal law entirely? Why should people accused of rape, burglary or murder be able to find a good lawyer either? I wonder if they could then make it criminal to recommend a good DUI lawyer to someone else, since you are making it harder for the state to get a conviction?
Look forward to TN lawyers changing their advertising to state “We specialize in that which cannot be named! Nudge Nudge Wink Wink Say No More!”
Yeah…if it wasn’t for those pesky courts and due process the police would be able to do whatever they wanted, and obviously we all want that. (/sarcasm)
I’m a bit surprised that Kurita’s a Democrat…normally it’s the Republicans trying to strip us of due process these days. Democrats usually just want to make us poor.
Doesn’t the fact that there are so many lawyers specializing in DUI cases perhaps indicate that the state’s having a pretty easy time getting people convicted?
Sam,
For politicians any conviction rate below 100% is grounds to claim that the system is stacked against prosecutors. Because obviously anyone who is accused is guilty…unless they’re representative of a bloc of people who vote for you, in which case they obviously should never have been accused in the first place.
This violates free speech protections, almost inarguably. Lawyers advertisements are only limited by the state interest of having ethical and high quality attorneys. The state interest of making it harder for people to find good/experienced/any attorneys will not suffice.
What’s interesting is how (at least according to the paraphrase) this moron phrased it: “it’s hard enough without lawyers advertising their expertise and offering discounts.” Obviously, lawyers doing those things in and of themselves has nothing to do with people being convicted, except that those things make it easier for people to a) find a lawyer, and b) afford a lawyer, respectively. So basically she is saying outright that “it’s hard enough without people having lawyers!”
Everything in the American legal system works towards the idea of promoting quality lawyering, regardless of side. Like Attorney-client privilege is based on the idea that it is more important to have excellent legal assistance than to have the lawyer play a role in the truth-finding.
This woman should rot in hell for being so willfully ignorant of due process and the Constitution.
I need to stop reading this blog.
[...] Tennessee lawmaker doesn’t like that you can make the government actually work to prove you are guilty by hiring a lawyer. Posted by Bitter at 3:52 pm Pesky Rights & Freedoms [...]
Maybe this is another of those cases where a legislator tacks something totally absurd onto an already absurd bill to make a point about the absurdity of it all? Its so hard to tell serious suggestions from theater these days.
Man, if they’re going to ban lawyers from advertising in a way that caters to DUI arrests, the next step has to be banning those bastards who help people negotiate their way out of back taxes with the IRS and/or states. Can’t have folks use somebody knowledgeable to negotiate their way out of paying a fair share, right?
Can lawyers still advertise to represent other lawyers who are accused of breaking the law against advertising to represent DUI defendants?
doncha love it when our political masters slip up and say what they really mean?
#2
That whole ‘due process’ thing bugs everyone in government from the street cop to the governor to the president. That’s why they’re trying to make it meaningless.
#5
“normally it’s the Republicans trying to strip us of due process these days. Democrats usually just want to make us poor.”
Democrap or Republicant, it doesn’t really matter these days. They are just two side of the same fascist coin.
#14
“doncha love it when our political masters slip up and say what they really mean?”
And it’s obvious no one is paying attention, or the bitch would already be covered in a liberal coating of tar and feathers.
Wait. Wouldn’t that be a violation of the First Amendment? Oops. I forgot. There is no First Amendment anymore.
This is just one of the many problems with the slide down the slippery slope that started in the 70’s (early 80’s?) when they (read the Government) banned smoking ads, for the children don’t ya know. Then they banned other speech, even when it was just speech with hate crime legislation. Now they don’t want people to be able to talk about what sort of lawyer they are. I wonder what jack-booted utopia this legislator has in mind.
#19 dagamore
This is just one of the many problems with the slide down the slippery slope that started in the 70’s (early 80’s?) when they (read the Government) banned smoking ads…
My favorite was the law saying they couldn’t specify the alcohol content of beer on the label but they couldn’t not specify it on wine labels.
There is nothing the government can’t do using the excuse of a “compelling interest”. It used to be that the bill of rights was a pain in the ass for government. Now they’re not even a minor annoyance.
Word has it her Democratic opponent is a DUI lawyer….
Back when I started practice, ALL lawyer ads were banned. The Supreme Court held that was unconstitutional. I’d say that would apply here.
Maybe MADD has come up with a new theme and fundraiser? I mean, they got legal limits cut from .15 to .08 and then .05. At least here, they got all plea bargaining outlawed. A mandatory day in jail for first offense, much more for repeats, 120 days’ suspension of license, must take (and pay for) courses sold by MADD.
There really isn’t much purpose left to the organization, but they’re probably hunting for one.
I agree this bill is absurd and the legislator who was behind it has a serious agenda.