Whether a federal appeals court has the power to disbar an attorney

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether a federal appeals court has the power to disbar an attorney by denying the attorney an evidentiary hearing (which the attorney requested) based on judges’ cursory conclusory contention that the attorney’s “arguments” are “largely frivolous and conclusory.” 2. Whether a federal appeals court has the power to disbar an attorney based on nothing more than judges’ mere conclusory contention that some unidentified “evidence” of some unidentified attorney “misconduct” merely was “set forth” in inadmissible hearsay in a prior “order.” 3. Whether federal judges have the power to create (or imply) an evidentiary privilege for judges to allow judges to avoid testifying (under oath subject to cross-examination) when judges’ hearsay is the purported “evidence” used to justify disbarring an attorney. 4. Whether a federal court may disbar an attorney based on a prior court’s purported disciplinary action without affording such attorney notice identifying particular purported misconduct and all facts material to proving such misconduct and affording such attorney a reasonable opportunity to respond to such notice. ii QUESTIONS PRESENTED—Continued 5. Whether a federal court may disbar an attorney without issuing a decision identifying the attorney’s purported misconduct, stating findings of material facts and identifying clear and convincing evidence of each such fact. 6. Whether a federal court may punish an attorney because such attorney stated in federal court filings that a judge (while presiding over court proceedings) asserted falsehoods the judge knew were false and committed federal offenses (e.g., 18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 371, 1001, 1348, 13849, 1512(b) or 1519) before the disbarring court shows or identifies clear and convincing evidence of all facts material to proving that the attorney statements were factually false, i.e., the judge did not assert such lies or commit such crimes.