|
TAXI
TALK Probing Bias of TLC Judges By DAN ACKMAN Talk to any cabbie and he is likely to tell you that
the Taxi and Limousine Commission courts are biased, or corrupt, or worse.
The TLC judges accept the word of TLC inspectors or complaining
passengers as Biblical Truth, while disregarding the testimony of taxi
drivers as heresy. The TLC,
of course, has always denied it while, at the same time, keeping even the
most basic aspects of those courts hidden from public view. Now a federal judge has given support, albeit still
limited support, for the cabbies' view, and has cleared the way for an
investigation of the TLC's judicial practices.
In a decision released on April 29, 2002, U.S. District Judge
Raymond Dearie, who sits in Brooklyn, ruled that the taxi driver
plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the TLC and TLC and city officials had
presented evidence that the TLC courts are systemically corrupt. In a case that challenged the TLC's so-called
Operation Refusal, Judge Dearie also ordered the TLC to stop its practice
of suspending cabbies without a hearing. In so ruling, the judge announced
what should have been obvious, but which the TLC refused to concede: the
U.S. Constitution protects the rights of taxi drivers and applies even to
TLC officials. Judge Dearie ordered that the drivers and their
lawyers be allowed to demand discovery—that is TLC internal documents
and sworn testimony from TLC officials—in order to prove their claim.
The TLC and its lawyers had long refused to provide such evidence, part of
a pattern of TLC stonewalling. (Full disclosure: I am one of the lawyers
in the case, which is called Padberg v. McGrath-McKechnie.) The bias of TLC judges is not merely casual. It is
not based merely on a dislike of cab drivers, an admiration for TLC
inspectors, or a desire to please well-heeled passengers. It is, rather,
systemic. As a result, Judge Dearie ruled that the entire TLC court may be
unconstitutional. In America, most courts are set up in a way that
protects a judge's independence, allowing him to rule as the law and the
facts dictate. A federal judge, for example, has what's called life
tenure. He has his job for life and can only be removed if he does
something criminal and is impeached by Congress. Most state judges serve
for 14 year terms, and are almost always re-appointed after that. Even
so-called administrative law judges, who work inside public agencies,
typically serve for very long terms. The result of this arrangement is that a judge can,
if the law warrants, rule against the government or against a rich or
powerful person without fear for his job. This arrangement—judges ruling
without fear or favor-- is the foundation of the independent judiciary,
which is, in turn, a key aspect of the American Constitution. TLC judges operate under a very different
arrangement. They are
appointed by the TLC without real criteria other than being a lawyer. Then
they serve on a "per-diem" basis.
This means they are hired on a day-by-day basis, as appointed by
the TLC's chief judge, who works for the TLC Chair. If the TLC does not
like how a particular judge rules, they don't have to call him or her
back. In other words, the TLC does not even have to fire a judge it does
not like. All it has to do is not re-hire him the next day or the next
month. That a judge serves at the pleasure of the
commission—without any sort of job protection—does not necessarily
mean that he will rule the way the TLC brass wants him to rule. An honest
judge will still call 'em like he sees 'em. But the pressure to rule a certain way can easily
sway even a judge who wants to be honest, who tries to be honest, who
believes he is honest. He can
start to rule in favor of his pay-master, even while convincing himself
that he is being fair. Soon he starts thinking a certain way and ruling a
certain. This tendency certainly seems to dominate the TLC judges. To combat that tendency, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled
long ago that a court where a judge has even an indirect financial
interest in the outcome of his rulings is unconstitutional. At the TLC, a
judge can be fired (or not re-hired) based on how he rules.
How much more tainted can that judges' ruling be? Judge Dearie has now allowed lawyers for the cabbies
dive in and investigate just how the TLC organizes its courts. They can
ask how the judges are hired and fired, who supervises them, and who
follows up on their rulings. In
the past, the TLC has strived mightily to conceal this information. The truth, once discovered, should be interesting. |