“The all-Republican Texas Supreme Court is an intellectually corrupt court. By this I mean that it is infused with the appearance of impropriety and inequity. Who you are matters more than the law and the facts. It has become a wholly owned subsidiary of Texans for Lawsuit Reform. It is also rife with judges who have committed ethical lapses…

“[Dale] Wainwright contributes about as much to the Court as an amoeba. He is a go-along judge. He did graduate from an outstanding law school (University of Chicago) and he worked for major law firms. But he is just another TLR vote on the Court.

“[Phil] Johnson has done little to nothing to bring balance to the Court.

“[Kenneth] Law wrote the notorious opinion that let Tom DeLay off the legal hook by ruling that checks are not cash. He also refused to allow a dissent in that case to be filed by a Democratic colleague, despite having no legal authority for his refusal. I can hardly wait to vote him out of office.

These are just my opinions. No one has to like them or be influenced by them. My approach to judicial races is that the Texas legal system is badly out of balance and has been corrupted by the money and power of Texans for Lawsuit Reform — Like so many reformers, TLR set out to do good, and did do good, but then became enamored of power and its ability to spread money around. It is time to restore balance and integrity to the Texas judicial system.”

So do you have a choice? The answer is yes. If you want to find out more, this web site can get you ready to make your choices for a fair and balanced court:

www.fairandbalancedcourt.com

This happened the same week a key ally of Robert Perry’s, the Texas Association of Business pleaded guilty to a campaign funding scheme hatched by Tom DeLay and benefiting House Speaker Tom Craddick.  The same week another Perry group, Texans for Lawsuit Reform, endorsed Texas Supreme Court incumbents  Wallace Jefferson, Dale Wainwright, and Phil Johnson.

Racism. Corruption. Ethics violations. These aren’t Texas values. But, sadly, they are part of the cloud of corruption that surrounds the Texas judiciary. The corruption is so widespread it can be hard to keep in perspective. That’s why we’ve put them together in one email for you, that’s why we’re detailing the “connections of the corrupt” at CourtsOnFire. You can find additional details at Texas Watch and Texans for Public Justice.

We are in a crisis in our courts. We hope you will remind friends, family, colleagues and neighbors of the importance of voting in judicial elections. We’re not going to tell you how to vote. We ask that you investigate the facts and make informed decisions.

While taking a break from flacking for his energy plan that would benefit his new natural gas company, Pickens went up to New York to file a lawsuit against a bankrupt company. That’s right, Lehman Brothers, a bankrupt company. He’s asking for some money back from Lehman Brothers that they lost in a bad deal.

He’s lucky that the case was filed in New York. In Texas, we know what happens to plaintiffs cases that go before the Texas Supreme Court. They get ruled against 87% of the time. But something tells me they’d make an exception for the million dollar donor that funds their campaigns.

Democratic and Republican legislators both said the court got the ruling wrong. They argued that the intent of the workers comp law was not to shield employers from liability from contract employees. They argued that the workers comp law only applied to actual employees of a company.

The good news is that the court agreed to this rare rehearing. The first bit of bad news is that they didn’t allow the legislators to address the court. That’s right, they held the rehearing largely because of legislative pressure, but didn’t want to hear what the legislators had to say. Heaven forbid the lawmakers tell the court what the intent of the law was supposed to be.

The other bad news is that all we can do now is hurry up and wait. The Texas Supreme Court is notorious for their slow pace of work. It isn’t unusual for cases to be heard orally and then years will pass before an opinion is issued. Something tells me they won’t be in a hurry to change one of their own decisions that would end up helping Texas workers. Set your alarm clock only if you can program in a date that is years away.

Well, we now know what Law did with the blindfold on the statue of justice; he’s just slid it down to cover her mouth.

It has been revealed that Law is trying to prevent a dissenting opinion in the case by fellow Justice Jan Patterson from being published. It is incredibly rare that a justice is not allowed to publish a dissenting opinion. However, it makes perfect sense in this case since it involves Tom DeLay and the involvement of dirty money in funding political races.

Justice Patterson has taken this issue to the Texas Supreme Court. Guess who funds the elections of the Texas Supreme Court? You guessed it, the supporters of big corporations and insurance companies. Don’t we know how this is all going to turn out?

In Texas, voters elect their judges. This year, three incumbents on the Texas Supreme Court are up for election:  Wallace Jefferson, Dale Wainwright and Phil Johnson. Their court has been widely criticized for favoring corporate defendants 87 percent of the time — leaving the citizens of Texas uprotected in the civil justice system.

As we’ve reported over the last days and weeks, other judges on the court have their own difficulties. David Medina in connection with the arson of his home and questionable reimbursements for travel. Nathan Hecht for receiving improper contributtions. Paul Green for improper reimbursements.

Now Lise Olsen of the Houston Chronicle is reporting the unprecedented numbers of federal judges under investigation. All are protected by lifetime appointments.

U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent is the first federal judge to be indicted for alleged federal sex crimes, but he’s only the latest in a string of jurists to face misconduct allegations in 2008, for behavior such as frequenting a topless club or lying under oath.

Nationwide, four other federal judges are being investigated for, among other things, taking cash from lawyers, using an escort service, posting nude photos on a personal Web site and abusing power in court.

The flurry of federal disciplinary activity appears unprecedented under the modern review system, established by Congress in 1980, according to experts and official court statistics.

The investigations involve improper communication with people involved in cases before their courts, visits to topless clubs, pornography on personal websites. It goes on and on.

What’s clear is that there really is a crisis in our judiciary. We hope voters will pay special attention to court races on the ballot this year. Only citizens can solve the deterioration of our courts. Until we do, justice will continue to retreat from our grasp.

Well, the Austin American-Statesman recently endorsed his opponent for another reason. Justice Law just doesn’t do his job very well. It points out that he’s let the court become politicized, they are slow at issuing opinions, and that he’s the slowest producer of them all.

A survey by the Austin Bar Association bears this out. Of the five justices on the 3rd Court of Appeals, Law has the lowest score among them for whether or not he is hard-working. More that half of the answers given said he needs to improve. He also receives the lowest score among the justices over whether he correctly applies the law.

Does Texas really need a lazy judge who incorrectly applies the law when he does get to work?

It highlights their rulings against consumers, their secretive decision-making and their lazy work habits all in a funny three minute video. We have a chance in November to restore some balance to the Texas Supreme Court. The future of ordinary Texans to get a fair shake in our court system is at stake.

They did have time, however, to play the role of crime solver.  In San Antonio, a moviegoer name Luis Gutierrez was murdered in the parking lot of the Alamo Quarry Market.  He was robbed of his wallet and his killers got away and have never been found.

A jury awarded $5 million to his family and the verdict was confirmed by the Fourth Court of Appeals.  They said that the mall’s owners, Trammel Crow, knew there was a crime problem at the mall and needed to do more to protect their customers since there had already been 10 robberies at the mall in the recent past.

In Texas, 87% of cases before the Texas Supreme Court get decided in favor of the insurance company or big corporation.  So naturally, Trammel Crow had the $5 million judgment against them overturned.

While the San Antonio police were unable to solve the crime, Trammel Crow argued and the Texas Supreme Court agreed that Gutierrez was murdered because he had previously provided information to the police in a burglary case.  As a result, the Court said Trammel Crow was not responsible for Gutierrez safety.  That’s right, they were able to determine a motive for his murder even though the police had been unable to make a case.  Is there anything this court won’t say or do to rule in favor of the special interests in this state?