10-11-02 The Judiciary-Banking Complex, the Greater Depression, and Piercing the Corporate Veil //

FROM THE LAWSTERS DISCUSSION GROUP
_   _ _
Benjamin Cardozo (in office 1932-1938)_ Louis Brandeis_(in office 1916-1931) _Learned Hand (in office 1924-1961)

2010 Supreme Court of the United States

On 11/1/2010, Joseph Zernik wrote:

I agree regarding  the contribution of Cardozo, Brandeis, and their colleagues in "piercing the corporate veil".  Contrast that with the recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States regarding First Amendment rights for corporate spending on political campaigns, and you get a Moment of Clarity, regarding the role of the judiciary then and now.

At 07:55 AM 11/1/2010, Charles wrote:

I like the phrase "Judicial-Banking Complex" as an evolutionary stage growing out of the "Military Industrial Complex", though "corporate-government financial bureaucratic complex" might be both more generic and simultaneously more accurate, but I would disagree on your historical analysis in that, I'd say, there's never been ANYTHING like this in US (or world) history, because the relics of the Military-Industrial are still BEHIND the Judicial-Financial Complex.  
On the one hand---I think America was MUCH Freer in the "Substantive Due Process/Robber-Baron Era" of 1885-1925, and in my opinion, Roosevelt created much of the hard foundation for the current crisis---and cured and prevented nothing except a possible popular revolution (or at least a very violent rebellion) in the 1930s.  
It was the "progressive" reforms of 1905-1920 in particular, which had a lot of judicial support, including such ambiguous heroes as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Benjamin Cardozo, and Learned Hand, which ultimately undermined the substantive due process advocate and their world view.
I am not sure we can "thank" Roosevelt for having done so, either, although my grandparents were grateful because they perceived the alternative as full-fledged communistic uprising.  There are all kinds of evidence that such things were brewing.....but they have been largely ignored by historians of the period---because Roosevelt is worshipped almost as though he were a Saint, especially in the Ivy League and Wall Street quarters where fear of the possible American Bolshevik seizure of power was greatest.   The popular rebellions which might have formed, during the 1930s, without the New Deal, in my opinion might well have had nothing to do with "world communism" as it was understood at the time.
Charles E. Lincoln, III 
 Tierra Limpia
Tel: 512.968.2500
Deo Vindice
"God be with you,
and with thy spirit!" ____________
Von: Bob Sherin
An: lawsters@googlegroups.com
Gesendet: Sonntag, den 31. Oktober 2010, 18:23:43 Uhr
Betreff: Re: The Greater Depression, or Why are we stymied in impotency?
Very astute Joseph, but we can organize as a moving force in opposition.  Bob, nl

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:54 AM, joseph zernik <jz12345@earthlink.net> wrote:

The job is much more difficult then you realize. Those in power are not going to yield powers that they have usurped easily.  My analysis indicates that the US is now controlled by a judiciary-banking complex, much stronger than the old military-industrial complex.  Moreover, the judiciary have managed to get us to what I call "Robber Baron Revival Era".  Basically, we are back to 1920 or something like that, and what we are experiencing is worse than the Great Depression. Then too, it took Roosevelt, and the New Deal, and a threat to "pack" the Supreme Court, in order to get the US out of the situation.

That is the magnitude of the job ahead.

At 01:23 AM 11/1/2010, Bob wrote:

All right, good, we see eye to eye.  Unfortunately, I'm not that leader either, though I have lots of time on my hands.  If one or more with vision, knowledge and organizational skills would only emerge and lead the rest of us, we could do the job, I know.

Bob, nl 

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 6:27 PM, legal abuse syndrome <legalabuse@gmail.com> wrote:

I agree and I am in for the race but cannot organize it or even create on that level as I am stretched to the maximum but no unhappily.

I do not see it as a negative campaign.  I admire each of you and support your efforts as you can tell with my years of service to Meryl.

I am sorry if you misunderstood what I meant.  I open so many emails each day with much negative and I have to stay away from anything that is non productive.  I am really devoted to grassroots efforts and know how critical it is to deal with entrenched corruption.  Florida is deadlocked in entrenched corruption.  They are ready for anyone coming down the main legal path.  We have to find innovative ways to get around it.  No authority cares.

Karin

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Bob Sherin <bobsherin@gmail.com> wrote:

Karin,

From your perspective, you're not impotent:  You lead a meaningful, helping life.  If you consider my hue and cry negatively unworthy, that is your prerogative.  I too am always involved in my own meaningful work with this issue. 

But I see a huge campaign ahead, where some leader or leaders rise to the top, organize a grass roots movement to legally topple this manifest injustice, making whole Jack Thompson, Mark Adams, Meryl Lanson, Steve Esdale, Matthew McMillan, Nancy Grant and other deserving folks, most of whom I don't even know.  To be part of such a movement would be the crowning achievement of my life because it could move mountains.  Sorry, you see this as a negative campaign. 

Bob Sherin, nl

At  PM 11/1/2010, Joseph Zernik wrote:

Securitization was only a small part of it.  Securitization became a necessity, since sub-prime lenders have been funding for about a decade prior to 2007 government-backed Uniform Residential Loan Applications (1003s) in disregard of fundamental "sound banking principles" and regulations of the Federal Reserve.

At 04:29 PM 11/1/2010, Jon wrote:

Wrong. The financial crisis that hit us in 2007 and since was not subject to and would not have been avoided by the regulations that had been removed since about 1992. The beginnings of securitization go back to 1985. There have never been any regulations that would have retarded this crisis, much less avoided it, nor are there any bureaucratic regulations that can do so in the future. I have long proposed about the only kind of intervention that might help: the use of grand juries to investigate and expose unsound business practices before they can cause disasters, but not using "regulations" as they are used by the Administrative State, which can never anticipate all the ways clever speculators can find to risk our money. We need teams of ordinary, common sense citizens to poke around looking for dangerous practices, without preconceptions of what they are looking for.

On 10/31/2010 09:07 PM, joseph zernik wrote:

Through deregulation, we were placed back at around 1920, with predictable results.

-- Jon

----------------------------------------------------------
Constitution
Society              
http://constitution.org
2900 W Anderson Ln
C-200-322             
Austin, TX 78757
512/299-5001                  

jon.roland@constitution.org