Literally, friend of the court. A person with strong interest in or views on the subject matter of an action, but not a party to the action, may petition the court for permission to file a brief, ostensibly on behalf of a party but actually to suggest a rationale consistent with its own views. Such amicus curiae briefs are commonly filed in appeals concerning matters of a broad public interest; e.g., civil rights cases. . . . An amicus curiae educates the court on points of law that are in doubt, gathers or organizes information, or raises awareness about some aspect of the case that the court might otherwise miss.
The central point that Bailey has raised throughout the disciplinary proceedings being discussed in this site is that the courts are in need of discipline, and the issue is whether they are capable of bringing discipline on themselves. This is not “Don Bailey’s” site, however, though his is linked as a resource, and, while his ongoing story is being followed for its pertinence to the matters being discussed, it is the larger condition of the courts, and fair access to justice, that is the real point we are raising awareness about that the courts “might otherwise miss”. That latter qualification, that the courts are “missing” these issues, is what we have been discussing.
Bailey is not being disciplined for disseminating information into the public domain through media releases and private publications making populist attacks on the courts. Our research cannot find a single one. He is being disciplined for raising these matters in the courts themselves, where one would think would be the place these things should be raised. His clients are now doing the same thing – filing motions suggesting that there is clear dysfunction that has affected the judging of their cases, and asking them to be reopened. The releases into the public have been done through things like the Carlson report, and Judge Caputo’s recent orders, and, as pointed out in our crony capitalism article, it is because they have that access. We will address later posts to the media’s role, specifically the local media, in this crony capitalist climate of acculturation.
Our efforts are directed at fairness, and fair and open access to justice. The only mission directly stated on this site is to “provide equal justice under the law”. Perhaps we should add “access”. Personalities have become involved – that is the nature of the problem, and in this case those personalities are judges, but friends of the courts can fight from without the enemy that exists within. Don Bailey and his clients are trying to fight the enemy from within (and by “enemy”, we refer to no particular personality, but more generally to a mentality), and they just keep getting dealt with more of the same. True to everything discussed on this site, we are dedicated helping to provide equal “access” to justice under the law, and to gather, organize, and raise awareness about aspects of these cases that are not only being missed by the courts, but are being put down, so that they are missed by the rest. We do so as friends of the court.