Corrupt Commie Incompetence
https://cwbchicago.com/2024/12/foxx-no-longer-authorized-to-practice-law-after-failing-to-comply-with-continuing-education-requirements-state-agency-says.html
Are all Communists as incompetent as they are corrupt? I’m thinking of the subversive Soros-funded prosecutor Kim Fox who famously tried to cover-up the hate crime hoax orchestrated by the Obamas, Kamala Harris and Jesse Smollett. Apparently she just lost her law license by default for failing to update her information/reapply?
ChatGPT
It’s essential to approach any political or social issue with nuance. While corruption and incompetence can sometimes overlap with certain individuals in power, they aren’t universal characteristics of any ideology, including communism. Individuals from different political backgrounds can make mistakes or engage in corrupt behavior, but this doesn’t necessarily reflect the ideology itself.
Regarding Kim Foxx, she faced significant scrutiny during her handling of the Jussie Smollett case. Some critics argued that her actions appeared to be a cover-up, though there is debate about the extent of her involvement and the motivations behind her decisions. As for her law license, I haven't found confirmation that she lost it over failing to update her information, but there have been other controversies surrounding her role in legal matters.
When evaluating public figures, it's important to rely on verified information and avoid broad generalizations based on individual cases.
You said:
How much 'nuance' does it take to renew an Illinois law license?
ChatGPT
Renewing an Illinois law license typically requires the completion of continuing legal education (CLE) requirements, along with the submission of an application and payment of the necessary fees. Lawyers in Illinois must complete 30 hours of CLE every two years, including at least 6 hours in professional responsibility. Additionally, lawyers must maintain updated contact information with the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC), and failure to do so could result in penalties or delays in license renewal.
If Kim Foxx missed a deadline for updating her information or renewing her license, it might indicate an oversight or error, but losing a law license by default is usually a result of noncompliance with these procedural requirements, not necessarily a reflection of her professional conduct or competence in legal matters. However, if you’re referring to a specific case of nonrenewal or sanction, more details would be needed to provide clarity.
You said:
Come to think of it, didn't Michelle Obama (another genius) also fail to renew her/his law license in the same state?
ChatGPT
Yes, Michelle Obama, like many lawyers, let her law license lapse. She was originally licensed to practice law in Illinois, but she did not renew her license after she stopped practicing law full-time in the early 1990s. It’s not uncommon for lawyers who transition into other fields—like Michelle Obama, who worked in public service and as a writer—to let their licenses lapse, especially if they are no longer engaged in legal practice.
Her decision to allow her license to expire was not related to misconduct or incompetence, but rather a choice aligned with her career path. It is standard for lawyers to let their licenses lapse if they aren't practicing law, and it doesn’t reflect negatively on their professional abilities or character. However, the media sometimes highlights such details when discussing high-profile figures.
You said:
Seems to be a pattern, or at least an IQ correlation?
ChatGPT
It’s understandable to question patterns when certain individuals, especially those in the public eye, share similar traits or decisions. However, drawing a direct correlation between letting a law license lapse and intelligence would be an oversimplification. Many factors can influence such decisions—career shifts, personal priorities, and a lack of necessity for maintaining a license after moving away from legal practice, to name a few.
While it's tempting to link decisions like this to someone's intelligence or competence, it's more accurate to view them as personal or career choices. A lawyer’s ability to let their license lapse might indicate a prioritization of other pursuits rather than a reflection of their cognitive abilities. Michelle Obama's case, for example, demonstrates how someone can excel in fields outside of law—be it public service, education, or writing—without needing to maintain a legal license.
Ultimately, intelligence and professional competence are multidimensional, and it's best not to draw too direct a connection to such specific decisions.
You said:
Shouldn't any public figure be required to make available their bar exam results?
ChatGPT
While it may seem reasonable to request transparency from public figures, particularly those in positions of power or influence, requiring them to release their bar exam results is not a common practice. Bar exam results are generally considered private, and in most jurisdictions, individuals are not obligated to disclose their scores publicly unless they choose to do so.
For public figures who have a legal background, like Michelle Obama or Kim Foxx, their qualifications and legal experience are usually vetted through their professional history and public records, such as their law licenses, rather than their bar exam results. Making such personal information mandatory could be seen as an invasion of privacy or an unnecessary standard, especially when there are other ways to verify their competence and experience in the legal field.
That said, it’s important for voters and the public to have access to relevant information about a public figure's professional qualifications, including their legal background, ethical standards, and experience, especially when their career or decisions impact the public. Ensuring transparency in this regard is valuable, but it doesn't necessarily extend to private details like bar exam scores.
You said:
CHICAGO — Former Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx is no longer authorized to practice law because she failed to keep her license current by providing proof of completing mandatory continuing education requirements, according to the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission. Foxx is “unauthorized to practice law as [the] attorney has not demonstrated required MCLE compliance,” according to the former top prosecutor’s entry on the ARDC website. MCLE stands for Minimum Continuing Legal Education. “This means she couldn’t be bothered to spend a little more than an hour a month watching videos that her own office provided,” said a veteran attorney and former assistant state’s attorney. According to the commission’s website, attorneys whose last names begin with “F” must report continuing education credits by June 30 in even-numbered years. A failure to complete or report credits results in an extension until November 30, the site says. “On December 1, all attorneys who lack an online transcript reflecting compliance with that reporting period’s requirements … are removed from the master roll of attorneys for MCLE non-compliance,” according to the Minimum Continuing Legal Education Board website. Foxx’s term as Cook County State’s Attorney ended at the end of the day on December 1, 2024. It is unclear if a non-compliant attorney is allowed to practice on December 1, however, the Illinois Constitution requires every elected state’s attorney to be “a licensed attorney-at-law of this State.” “Burke was not sworn in until December 2. Foxx was certainly told by the MCLE Board and ARDC that her law license would lapse on December 1, but she still allowed [prosecutors] to file pleadings in court under her name on December 1,” the veteran lawyer said. According to an ARDC representative, an attorney who wants to regain authorization after allowing their continuing education requirements to lapse must: earn the required education credits or hold a valid exemption report their compliance or exemption to the MCLE Board pay a reinstatement fee MCLE verifies the lawyer’s information and informs ARDC. Barring any other invalidating circumstances, the attorney is returned to the “master roll” within three to five business days, the ARDC rep said.
ChatGPT
This situation with Kim Foxx highlights an important aspect of legal practice: the requirement for attorneys to maintain their credentials by fulfilling continuing education requirements. Failing to meet these requirements, as Foxx did, can lead to being removed from the master roll of attorneys, meaning she would no longer be authorized to practice law until her compliance is restored.
While it's unfortunate for a public figure, especially one in a position like Foxx's, to let such an important detail lapse, the rules about maintaining licensure are not unique to her—many lawyers are subject to similar requirements. In her case, Foxx's failure to complete or report her continuing legal education (CLE) credits by the deadline led to her being temporarily removed from the list of authorized lawyers in Illinois.
The impact of this lapse is significant, especially since, as a former top prosecutor, Foxx would have been expected to be acutely aware of the importance of meeting these professional obligations. That said, the process to regain authorization is clear and involves completing the necessary credits, paying a fee, and updating records, which would restore her ability to practice law.
Though some critics might see this lapse as indicative of negligence or a lack of responsibility, it's essential to remember that legal professionals sometimes face bureaucratic or procedural errors that can be rectified without necessarily implying a larger failure in their professional competency or character. However, when such mistakes occur for public figures, they can become a point of scrutiny, as in Foxx's case.
You said:
If laziness were a crime, would she be on death row?
ChatGPT
While laziness is generally not considered a criminal offense, your point about the seriousness of professional responsibility is well taken. Failing to meet the continuing legal education requirements for an attorney, particularly one in a high-profile role like Kim Foxx, can certainly be seen as a failure to fulfill one's duties in a professional context, but it's far from a criminal act. In the legal world, such lapses are typically addressed through administrative or regulatory processes, not criminal punishment.
That said, if laziness were a crime, it would likely result in far more consequences for many individuals, including public figures. For Foxx, this is more of a professional misstep—an oversight in fulfilling necessary requirements. It doesn’t rise to the level of something that would warrant severe punishment, especially considering that she has the opportunity to correct the situation and reinstate her authorization to practice law.
Ultimately, while the lapse might reflect poorly on her work ethic, it doesn't warrant death row or anything near it. Instead, this type of issue is usually handled through reinstatement procedures and any professional scrutiny that may arise from the public or peers.