Why Trump lawyers won’t ask Trump University judge to step aside; Reuters, 6/6/16

Alison Frankel, Reuters; Why Trump lawyers won’t ask Trump University judge to step aside:

"As many, many legal experts have opined in the past few days, a federal judge’s ethnicity or national origin cannot serve as the basis for a claim of judicial bias. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, for instance, held in its 1998 opinion in MacDraw Inc v. CIT Group that U.S. District Judge Denny Chin (now on the appeals court) was within his rights to sanction two lawyers who asked whether his Asian ancestry prejudiced him against them. (They were involved in completely separate litigation against an Asian fundraiser for President Bill Clinton, who appointed Chin.) “Courts have repeatedly held that matters such as race or ethnicity are improper bases for challenging a judge’s impartiality,” the 2nd Circuit said. Added Alexandra Lahav, who specializes in legal ethics at the University of Connecticut: “There is no basis in the law or our legal history. It’s antithetical to the rule of law.”

Trump has a First Amendment right to express his opinion of the Trump University proceedings, which have certainly not gone the way he and his lawyers would have liked...

Outside of court, Trump can say just about whatever he wants about the case without much risk of being held accountable. It might be another story if the candidate were to express contempt for Judge Curiel or the proceeding inside the judge’s courtroom, but so far, Trump has not made accusations to Curiel’s face.

Nor are the candidate’s lawyers responsible in court for what their client says about the judge outside of the courtroom. The American Bar Association’s model rules of professional conduct explicitly say that representing a client does not mean a lawyer endorses the client’s “political, economic, social or moral views or activities.” Ethics adviser Thomas Mason of Harris Wiltshire & Grannis said lawyers generally do not face sanctions for what their clients say – and that goes double when the client is running for president. “How easy do you think it would be for any lawyer at any firm to control what Mr. Trump says?” Mason asked.

If, however, O’Melveny were to accuse Judge Curiel of bias in a filing that cited only his heritage as evidence, according to legal ethics experts, the firm could be accused of bringing a frivolous motion, according to Mark Foster of Zuckerman Spaeder and Barry Cohen of Crowell & Moring, who counsel law firms on professional responsibility."

Graham calls on Republicans to un-endorse Trump; Politico, 6/7/16

Nick Gass, Politico; Graham calls on Republicans to un-endorse Trump:

"Graham wants fellow Republicans who have endorsed Donald Trump to take it all back in the wake of his repeated claims that Judge Gonzalo Curiel's heritage make him unfit to preside over lawsuits against him.

“This is the most un-American thing from a politician since Joe McCarthy,” Graham told The New York Times. “If anybody was looking for an off-ramp, this is probably it,” he added. “There’ll come a time when the love of country will trump hatred of Hillary.”"

Donald Trump Finally Admits His Campaign Is Racist; Huffington Post, 6/6/16

Amanda Terkel, Huffington Post; Donald Trump Finally Admits His Campaign Is Racist:

"Paul Manafort, Trump’s chief strategist, recently told The Huffington Post that Trump is unlikely to pick a woman or minority as a running mate because that would be seen as “pandering.”

If he were to become president, Trump would have the power to nominate candidates to the Supreme Court and other spots on the federal bench. But between his comments about race, religion and gender, the people Trump thinks would be unbiased enough to serve may make up a very narrow slice of the population."

Megyn Kelly Slams Donald Trump’s ‘Mexican’ Judge Remarks: ‘That Is Not The Way Our System Works’; Huffington Post, 6/7/16

Dominique Mosbergen, Huffington Post; Megyn Kelly Slams Donald Trump’s ‘Mexican’ Judge Remarks: ‘That Is Not The Way Our System Works’ :

"Kelly strongly disagreed with O’Reilly’s position.

“That is not the way our system works,” she said on her show an hour later.

“If a litigant making stink about a judge necessarily resulted in a conflict that would force the judge to step down, it would lead to chaos in our court system,” she added...

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich also skewered Trump’s position.

“We don’t judge you as part of a group. That would be to suggest that blacks can’t get a fair white judge, whites can’t get a fair black judge,” Gingrich said on “The John Gibson Show.” “Once you go down that road, you destroy America. You can’t take a group definition and apply it.”

On Sunday, Gingrich called Trump’s comments about Curiel “one of the worst mistakes Trump has made.”

“I think it’s inexcusable,” Gingrich told Fox News."

Megyn Kelly’s peace with Trump is officially over: Fox News host lashes out over attacks on Trump U judge for allegedly being “Mexican”; Salon, 6/3/16

Scott Eric Kaufman, Salon; Megyn Kelly’s peace with Trump is officially over: Fox News host lashes out over attacks on Trump U judge for allegedly being “Mexican” :

"On The Kelly File Thursday evening, host Megyn Kelly tore into Donald Trump for suggesting that the judge presiding over the Trump U case has a “an absolute conflict” of interest because “he’s a Mexican,” a group the GOP front-runner has repeatedly gone out of his way to offend.

The problems with Trump’s argument are many, but the biggest is the simple fact that — as Kelly pointed out earlier this week — Judge Gonzalo Curiel isn’t “Mexican,” given that he was born an American citizen in Indiana.

But Trump insists that because his parents were Mexican immigrants, Judge Curiel is incapable of rendering an objective verdict in the case — which is a canny legal move, when one thinks about it. First, you insult every ethnic group on the planet; second, when you’re sued for bilking thousands of people out of millions of dollars, claim that no one who isn’t 100 percent “American” can preside over your case.

Kelly didn’t go quite that far, saying only that “Trump continues to attack a sitting federal judge — who by the way, did a lot to fight the drug cartels when he was a prosecutor — based on his ethnicity.”

She added that “suggesting he has an inherent conflict of interest because of his heritage [is the equivalent of saying] ‘a Hispanic cannot judge a case against me.’ That is what Trump is saying.”"

Donald Trump and the Judge; New York Times, 5/31/16

Editorial Board, New York Times; Donald Trump and the Judge:

"In a rambling, 11-minute stream of vitriol, Mr. Trump, who has attacked Judge Curiel before, called him “very hostile” and a “hater of Donald Trump,” and said he “should be ashamed of himself. I think it’s a disgrace that he’s doing this.”

One would think Mr. Trump, whose sister is a federal appellate judge, would know how self-destructive it is for any litigant anywhere to attack the judge hearing his or her case. But Mr. Trump is not any litigant; he is running to be president of the United States — a job that requires at least a glancing understanding of the American system of government, in particular a respect for the separation of powers. When Mr. Trump complains that he is “getting railroaded” by a “rigged” legal system, he is saying in effect that an entire branch of government is corrupt.

The special danger of comments like these — however off the cuff they may sound — is that they embolden Mr. Trump’s many followers to feel, and act, the same way.

For good measure, Mr. Trump added that Judge Curiel “happens to be, we believe, Mexican.” False; the judge is from Indiana. But facts are, as always, beside the point for Mr. Trump, who reassured his audience that “the Mexicans are going to end up loving Donald Trump when I give all these jobs.” (Presumably he was not referring to those he has promised to deport if he is elected.)

In a masterpiece of understatement, Judge Curiel, who is prevented by ethical rules from responding directly to comments like these, noted in his order that Mr. Trump “has placed the integrity of these court proceedings at issue.”"