Clinton lawyers vow vigorous fight against disbarment
May 23, 2000
Web posted at: 5:22 p.m. EDT (2122 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Lawyers for President Clinton on Tuesday vowed to wage a vigorous fight against a recommendation that he be disbarred, as the conservative law firm that brought the legal complaint against the president supported the course of action.
An Arkansas Supreme Court disciplinary panel made the recommendation Monday, saying the president's testimony in the Paula Jones civil case constituted "serious misconduct."
Matthew Glavin, president of the Southeastern Legal Foundation, said the court set a clear standard.
"There simply is no place in the law for a man or woman who cannot or will not tell the truth, even when his or her own interests are involved," he said. "And the court finished this opinion by saying that honesty and candor are absolute prerequisites -- not sometimes, not for some people, but absolute prerequisites, even if you're the president of the United States of America."
Eight of the panel's 14 members, who were either Clinton appointees or Democratic Party contributors, had recused themselves because of potential conflicts of interest.
Sources close to the president told CNN that one possible argument his lawyers could make was that the remaining panel members were biased against the president. Glavin said the departures proved otherwise.
"Those six remaining members were nonpartisan in every way," Glavin said. "They hadn't donated to Republicans or Democrats, and that's what we need on the panel."
The committee met Friday to consider two complaints against the president that he should be disciplined for his testimony about his relationship with ex-White House intern Monica Lewinsky -- an affair that led to the president's impeachment.
In a letter to the court, the committee's executive director, James Neal, said a majority of the committee found "certain of the attorney's [Clinton's] conduct as demonstrated in the complaints constituted serious misconduct."
"This recommendation is wrong and is clearly contradicted by precedent. We will vigorously dispute it in a court of law," the president's attorney, David Kendall, said in a statement. The White House has contended that while the president's answers may have been misleading and evasive, they were not legally false.
In an NBC interview, Clinton said he would not "personally" defend himself, but leave appeal to his lawyers.
"The only reason I agreed even to appeal to this is my lawyers looked at all the precedents, and they said there's no way in the world, if they just treat you like everybody else has been treated, that this is even close to that kind of case," he said.
Rep. Asa Hutchinson (R-Arkansas), said he was confident the panel would treat the president fairly.
"I know that the committee looked at it as dealing with someone not a president, or not someone in public office, but someone who is a lawyer and has to uphold the standards of the profession," Hutchinson said.
One legal analyst said the disbarment recommendation ignored the "mitigating circumstances" of the president's life.
"He did lie under oath on several occasions in the Jones deposition," said New York University professor Stephen Gillers. "But on the other side of the scale, we have to consider such things as his 20-year record of public service, the fact that the information he withheld was only marginally relevant, and it didn't cause significant harm."
Clinton has been a lawyer for more than 25 years and taught law at the University of Arkansas law school.
The recommendation now goes to Pulaski County Circuit Court in Little Rock for action. A ruling against Clinton could be appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court.
|