Given the name, I'm guessing she's married to a US Citizen

Dishonest? She didn't tell the truth, the whole truth.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
Up until this story, I didn't know that citizenship was required to be a judge. I'm not even sure it is in every jurisdiction. Citizenship is usually not required to work, and certainly not required to pass the bar.

I was surprised also...because I knew you didn't have to be a citizen to pass or even take the Bar exam

quote:

Originally posted by ulsterman:
Dishonest? She didn't tell the truth, the whole truth.

They didn't ask her and it wasn't asked in the application

It's in the waiver, the common sense waiver.


Would an enemy soldier think it's OK to be a guard at a US base, just because no one asked? Would a tourist in Rome think they could be Emperor, just because a question was omitted from the application? Of course they wouldn't, because it's a ridiculous notion.

Just like the idea of a non-citizen being a Judge in the US Legal System.

(enormous eyeroll aimed at the very idea)

quote:

Would an enemy soldier think it's OK to be a guard at a US base, just because no one asked?

You'd think you'd need to be a citizen to be in the US Military too...but you don't

"What's happening is that nobody knew she had to be a citizen to be a Judge, and everyone just assumed that her being a lawful permanent resident was enough."

What ? How did you come up w that ?

It is Texas state law that Municipal judges have to be U.S. citizens.

From one of the articles:

"Generally, the city includes on applications for appointees a question about whether the appointee is a qualified voter, Garza said."


"However, that question was not included on the applications of some of the recent municipal court judge appointments"

"The staff went back to verify that current municipal court judges were qualified voters and found Burkett was not"

Texas has only 4 requirements for municipal judge:

(1) be a resident of this state;
(2) be a citizen of the United States;
(3) be a licensed attorney in good standing; and
(4) have two or more years of experience in the practice of law in this state.

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:

quote:

Originally posted by Snapping Twig:
Requirements for being a judge - citizenship.

She was not a citizen, ergo not a judge.

Try explaining why 1 + 1 does not equal 2.

Another example of our country running off the rails.

All her judgements are invalid IMO. She needs to see the inside of a prison.

The job didn't require her or anyone else to be a citizen. The fair application of the law to the facts wasn't done incorrectly as far as anyone knows, on any of her cases.

So what's the remedy? Retry them all? Perhaps but I'm not sure the results would be judicially different if you had citizen judge on the bench.

Before you all get your knickers in knot, ask yourself if the sentances handed out by her were wrong applications of the law to the facts or outside of judicial discretion. I'll venture and say that if you're honest about it, you're just irked by her citizenship status and not that the law was carried out appropriately.

Invalid assumption to the extreme.

We are all required to cross every T and dot every I, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Sound familiar?

No two tiered system in this country - I don't care who you are.

Especially a judge for God's sake!

Saying she didn't know better is pulling at straws at best, dishonest at the least.

I say again - prison for her.

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:

quote:

Would an enemy soldier think it's OK to be a guard at a US base, just because no one asked?

You'd think you'd need to be a citizen to be in the US Military too...but you don't

True

I was in Basic with a Jordanian.

But a Private E-nothing is a world apart from a Judge, even a lowly Municipal one, IMO. I doubt a non-citizen soldier has ever been a base commander, sub commander, Joint Chief, or the like. Or have they? Am I wrong to think this is crazy, as it seems truly absurd to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Snapping Twig:

I say again - prison for her.

Why prison?

What law did she break that carries with it prison penalty?

It's been beat into my head from observing all kind of law cases play out in the news that ignorance of the law is not a legal defense. It is state law that she be a US citizen.

Seems to me by the mere act of applying for a position she is not eligible to hold she committed fraud against the state.

Looking at the laws in the state of Texas (was trying to find the total number of state laws) I see categories for Fraud, Perjury, Embezzlement, and Identity theft. My guess is a third to fourth year law student in Texas could find something (probably multiple somethings) that she can be charged with.

Did she have malicious intent? Probably not but what if she is an immigrant activist? What better place than municipal court to be in a position to give illegal aliens a break.

She's probably a good person and a fair judge but she broke the law by applying even if the question wasn't on the application.

If she has not begun the process of becoming a legal citizen she should start now and after the same amount of time passed for her as everyone else and she becomes a citizen she can apply to be a judge again.

Assuming, of course, she doesn't have a felony conviction on her sheet then...

Reading between the lines, I believe she knew when she applied, but remaining an ROK citizen was more important to her.

Now that she has been caught, my my my but how her mind has changed.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
Put the pitchforks down boys.

The job ad and application didn't indicate that she needed to be a "Citizen." She is a legal permanent resident, authorized to work here in the US. Very few jobs require that you be a "citizen," and it's perfectly reasonable that she wouldn't know that some random municipal rule requires her to have citizenship.

They require that a judge be a registered voter. When they vetted another judge they discovered she wasn't on the voter roles. Sounds like there was a requirement that got dropped off the paperwork and now has been put on again. Now you have to ask is this omission occurred around the time she was appointed.

I understand muni judges don't necessarily handle the most complex cases all the time. But a judge should know that it's necessary to be a registered voter - and therefore a United States citizen - in the jurisdiction where they're going to sit on the bench. And yes, I do mean they should know it whether a question is printed on a form or not.

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:

quote:

Originally posted by ulsterman:
Dishonest? She didn't tell the truth, the whole truth.

They didn't ask her and it wasn't asked in the application

It is on the I-9 she had to complete:

"Form I-9 is used for verifying the identity and employment authorization of individuals hired for employment in the United States. All U.S. employers must ensure proper completion of Form I-9 for each individual they hire for employment in the United States. This includes citizens and noncitizens. Both employees and employers (or authorized representatives of the employer) must complete the form. On the form, an employee must attest to his or her employment authorization. The employee must also present his or her employer with acceptable documents evidencing identity and employment authorization. The employer must examine the employment eligibility and identity document(s) an employee presents to determine whether the document(s) reasonably appear to be genuine and to relate to the employee and record the document information on the Form I-9. The list of acceptable documents can be found on the last page of the form. Employers must retain Form I-9 for a designated period and make it available for inspection by authorized government officers. NOTE: State agencies may use Form I-9. Also, some agricultural recruiters and referrers for a fee may be required to use Form I-9."

My guess is the voter requirement was skipped at the city level, or the fix was in.

Anyone who thinks it is acceptable for a NON US citizen to be a judge is well, wrong. I don't care who's fault it was, hers, the state government, whomever.

Citizenship is suppose to mean something. It gets diluted more and more everyday. I don't care if she is a lawful permanent resident, she is not a citizen. She didn't put in the effort, the legwork, to become one. I don't care if she only decided small claims court under $100 dollars, you should have to be a citizen to do that.

So if it's ok for them to be judges, what's next? Being eligible to vote in the presidential election? Where does it stop? When does citizenship MEAN something???

I am lucky enough to be a US citizen by birth. I have great friends who earned that citizenship through service. She sure as hell didn't earn a judgeship. Let her put in the effort for citizenship. IF she wants it.

How the hell is it ok for someone to represent American justice if they can't even take the time to become a US citizen? Boggles my mind that people think this is ok. Not laying blame on any side, just that this is ok.

quote:

Originally posted by Aeteocles:
Put the pitchforks down boys.

The job ad and application didn't indicate that she needed to be a "Citizen." She is a legal permanent resident, authorized to work here in the US. Very few jobs require that you be a "citizen," and it's perfectly reasonable that she wouldn't know that some random municipal rule requires her to have citizenship.

Pick the pitchforks back up, but not for the lady.

Go after the dolts who hired her, knowing there were requirements but who neither put the requirements on the form or ask.

It is possible (guessing here) that political correctness may be responsible for the omission, rather than gross negligence. (Well, it could be both - grossly negligent political correctness is not unheard of.)

Either way, sharpen the pitchforks and heat up the tar, boys - there's bureaucrats to educate!

Let's assume that she indicated that she was a lawful permanent resident and she indicated it on her I-9 form. Still wouldn't have prevented this situation. The I-9 form is likely handled by HR, who probably has little to do with the vetting process. That is, she could have easily been truthful on everything, and nobody bothered to say hey, aren't you supposed to be a citizen?

I don't think the fault is on her at all. But just because HR screwd up dosen't mean she gets to keep her job. Go through the citizenship process like everyone else, and we'll talk.

Until then, continue practicing law. As a lawyer.

quote:

Originally posted by Icabod:
It is on the I-9 she had to complete

Actually it just ask that the applicant make a selection from one of the four listed.

If she answered honestly, and no one has said that she didn't, she did tell the whole truth