Image by Sergei Tokmakov, Esq. https://Terms.Law from Pixabay
Some Republican leaders are hoping to see a different strategy for regulating attorneys in Arizona.
House Speaker Ben Toma and Senate President Warren Petersen asked the state Supreme Court to consider no longer requiring the State Bar of Arizona to be the “regulator” and use the Arizona Office of the Courts instead, which would require a change in Rule 32.
The petition makes the case that the association requires attorneys to pay for “ideological trainings, social events, and lobbying initiatives through bar dues and request retroactive refunds” and that the Supreme Court already does most of the heavy lifting when it comes to regulations.
“Granting this Petition would rectify that problem. The Arizona Bar would no longer be mandatory. It could then advocate, even for ideological causes, through voluntary support. In the interim, Petitioners propose this Court institute a study committee to prepare this Court to assume the narrow regulatory responsibilities, most of which it already performs,” the petition filed by Holtzman Vogel, including former state Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould, states.
“Petitioners propose a date certain, January 1, 2027, by which the Arizona Bar would become fully voluntary and this Court – through the Arizona Office of the Courts (“AOC”) – would assume regulatory responsibilities,” the filing continues.
The organization said that it is still “committed to successfully executing its current mission to serve and protect the public and promote access to justice as provided by the Arizona Supreme Court.”
“The Board of Governors will review the petition and determine any response to the proposed rule change for the Court to consider,” the group told The Center Square in a statement.
2 thoughts on “Petition seeks to limit role of State Bar of Arizona – The Center Square”
The legal-law treadmill in Arizona must be reformed. This is a layer of government that has been corrupted by itself serving the interests of their associations with little supervision. Perhaps the influence of large influential industries and their funding is also a big part of the rulings and advancement of legal professionals. Note the State Attorney Bar Associations have disbarred Trump attorneys in New York and California removing their means of making a living.
I agree with Tom 100%. The courts have become a self-serving and self-policing branch of government. Without outside oversight this has led to the corruption in the courts that we now have.
The courts don’t want outside interference from stupid, mere mortals like us ordinary people who never went to law school. The courts have created a convoluted and byzantine legal system that only insiders can navigate and which benefits the judges who control their courtrooms like their own personal fiefdoms.
The concept of judicial independence is supposed to ensure that judges can make unbiased decisions free from outside interference. The reality is that in the absence of outside oversight judges can and do make biased and self-serving decisions without any checks on their power aside from other judges who are also part of this flawed and crooked judicial cartel.
Comments are closed.