|
|
Post by victor31 on Jul 27, 2018 19:48:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by SPN Lifer on Jul 27, 2018 20:05:36 GMT -5
Article highlights:
|
|
|
|
Post by Legal Beagle on Jul 27, 2018 20:43:34 GMT -5
Nope.
|
|
|
|
Post by generalsherman on Jul 27, 2018 20:47:43 GMT -5
His argument is very persuasive, as his evidence is that he knows a few ALJs and because they’re liberal all the other 1,800 ALJs must also be liberal.
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jul 27, 2018 20:50:32 GMT -5
His argument is very persuasive, as his evidence is that he knows a few ALJs and because they’re liberal all the other 1,800 ALJs must also be liberal. No evidence is as powerful as anecdotal evidence. I'm convinced. |
|
|
|
Post by ALJD on Jul 27, 2018 21:08:25 GMT -5
Applying the same logic that blog writer used, the handful of lawyers I knew in San Francisco were all liberals. So all the lawyers in the U.S. must be liberals. Yeah right. That article is not worth the electron it's formatted on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2018 22:07:34 GMT -5
Ummm, Yeah. He just seems... out of touch?
Paul Mirengoff is a retired attorney in Washington, D.C. He is a 1971 graduate of Dartmouth College and a 1974 graduate of Stanford Law School. He has two daughters and lives with his family in Bethesda, Maryland. Paul supports Everton FC of the English Premier Soccer League, as well as the Washington Redskins, the Washington Wizards, and the University of Maryland basketball team.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jul 28, 2018 2:40:22 GMT -5
Ummm, Yeah. He just seems... out of touch?Paul Mirengoff is a retired attorney in Washington, D.C. He is a 1971 graduate of Dartmouth College and a 1974 graduate of Stanford Law School. He has two daughters and lives with his family in Bethesda, Maryland. Paul supports Everton FC of the English Premier Soccer League, as well as the Washington Redskins, the Washington Wizards, and the University of Maryland basketball team. Yes, out of touch is what I felt. |
|
|
|
Post by phoenixrisingALJ on Jul 28, 2018 5:56:54 GMT -5
1. No. 2. He lives in Washington DC, where liberals live. Maybe poll the ALJ's in Middlesboro and Fort Smith? 3. No. There are so many former military folks who are ALJ's that an "almost entirely liberal" ALJ corps is laughable on its face. 4. No. This is someone just poisoning the well. Really- only liberals live in DC? You are just as bad as that blog writer! |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Jul 28, 2018 6:57:10 GMT -5
Back in 2013, this thread would already be shut down. I guess now that there is no register, we can talk liberal v. conservative, union v. management, just go off on any crazy tangent we wish. This article is idiotic! It is obviously written by a RIGHT WIND IDIOT, I have only done this for 4 years, but I have been down South and way West, when ALJs used to be selected after a long testing process that DID NOT give one second of thought about your political background, graded you on the various tests and interviews, ranked you with a NOR score and hired you after YET another interview with the agency. To suggest with the previous process somehow produced liberal ALJs is as idiotic as anything that FunkyOdar (now a FunkyOHO) has ever uttered on this board. I have met very FEW liberal ALJs, most all are right of center (or barely center left) as I can smell a rightwinger from a 100 yards!  (That's a joke for the idiots on this board!) If I had posted this in 2013, ALJD and Pixie would have shut this thread down already. Sounds like 2018 will be fun times for TigerLaw on the board! To me it sounds as if it might be short times on the board for ole' Tiger Law in 2018. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by ba on Jul 28, 2018 8:05:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Jul 28, 2018 8:14:49 GMT -5
Just to play Devil's advocate here, I'll (partially) defend the article.
1. We here on the board tend to equate ALJs with SSA (or OMHA) ALJs, since they make up the vast majority. But, in articles such as this I suspect the focus in on ALJs at agencies such as the SEC or FEC.
2. As I understand it (very third and fourth hand) the way those ALJs came to be was they would be attorneys who worked for those agencies (as advocates) who then became SSA ALJs until they could get hired back.
3. Even if they were all upstanding individuals who rules without bias, their background will always inform who they are, and as importantly how they are perceived. In my previous life as a criminal attorney, if we got a new judge the first thing everyone wanted to know was were they a prosecutor or defense attorney.
4. Finally- I think there has been enough data that shows government workers in general tend to be Democrats.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmyjiggles on Jul 28, 2018 11:07:13 GMT -5
I think it most unwise for any fed to express any political opinion - whether on this board, on social media, in writing, or even verbally to trusted friends or family - that is contrary to to those of the administration.
And I would define political opinion quite broadly, as in anything that could possibly be construed as commenting on any aspect of political ideology, personality, appearance, etc, whether that is current or remote.
As this article suggests, purging is going to be commonplace, and I wouldn’t count on a lot of due process when it happens.
Perhaps you find this position cowardly, but I don’t have the protections of an ALJ (even if I did I would keep my mouth shut) and I’ve got mouths to feed.
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on Jul 28, 2018 11:43:47 GMT -5
Short version: alj leanings are across the board 😲🙄
And shockingly, if addressed in article, conservative judges find people disabled and liberal judges find people not disabled.
|
|
|
|
Post by aljwishhope on Jul 28, 2018 11:49:35 GMT -5
Short version: alj leanings are across the board 😲🙄 And shockingly, if addressed in article, conservative judges find people disabled and liberal judges find people not disabled. Also in my experience, not only due to Hatch Act, as a federal attorney my colleagues rarely openly discussed their political leanings. I could only guess or otherwise wrongly assume. |
|
|
|
Post by foghorn on Jul 28, 2018 14:45:15 GMT -5
Short version: alj leanings are across the board 😲🙄 And shockingly, if addressed in article, conservative judges find people disabled and liberal judges find people not disabled. Indeed, and let's face it what was a liberal Republican is now considered a RINO etc. so who can say. But the bigger point is on the bench people will rule regardless of leanings--the most liberal former income benefits advocate isn't going to give it away, though they may find a reason not to find a person's drinking problem a significant contributing factor etc. But the same could be said of a conservative who may empathize with a good ole' boy disabled who eschews pain management (sic) for a nip or two of JD or Old Windbag. What a load of stuff. Now, at FEC I know some individuals are specifically designated R or D. But that's the way that is supposed to be. At other agencies, I believe that the change of administrations (largely Republican overall in number of years each) assured that wild eyed radicals were not appointed to the bench. Of either persuasion. And as an overall large-ish group, you have here and there exceptions. Now the Federal Bench........ let's not go there. |
|
ducky
Full Member
Blowing in the wind
Posts: 107 
|
Post by ducky on Jul 28, 2018 15:30:27 GMT -5
I cannot weigh credibility, I can only address consistency with medical evidence. Some days that’s a blessing, and some days it’s a curse. Some days that might tie my hands. Some days it might not. Life in the ALJ hearing room is seldom black and white. Grid rules often tie our hands and that is something not understood by many people. And, political leanings are often more complicated than the article contemplates. But why let vast over generalization slow down an opinion piece.
|
|
|
|
Post by lurkerbelow on Jul 28, 2018 15:35:31 GMT -5
Okay I think it’s clear that this article is not targeted at us going by the clearly faulty facts and broad generalizations. Who is it targeted at and why?
|
|
|
|
Post by rhd on Jul 28, 2018 16:48:34 GMT -5
Okay I think it’s clear that this article is not targeted at us going by the clearly faulty facts and broad generalizations. Who is it targeted at and why? The poorly educated, obviously.
Because, you know, deep state, Socialism, free stuff, death panels, Muslims. Oh, don't forget tan suits. That's a biggie.
|
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Jul 28, 2018 17:12:04 GMT -5
To assume that an ALJ's political leanings are relevant to his or her rulings, is to me, a clear indication of a gross misunderstanding of what we do.
|
|
(That's a joke for the idiots on this board!) 
