Attorneys Shouldn't Have to Go Through Metal Detectors to Enter Courthouses
Why is it that attorneys, who now carry state and federally issued bar identity cards so that they may carry their phones into a courthouse, must wait on line to pass through metal detectors, emptying pockets, removing outer garments, suit jackets, shoes and belt?
March 01, 2019 at 01:18 PM
3 minute read
Several years ago an ad announcing the importance of lawyers stated: “When lawyers talk people listen.” Apparently, no one has been saying a thing about the outrageously submissive position we have taken when it comes to addressing our own status, as second-class citizens when it comes to entering the federal courts in our metropolitan area. Why is it that attorneys, who now carry state and federally issued bar identity cards so that they may carry their phones into a courthouse, must wait on line to pass through metal detectors, emptying pockets, removing outer garments, suit jackets, shoes and belt? Are we not to be trusted?
I often observe U.S Attorneys, attended by interns, who are summering students; agents, cafeteria and maintenance staff, walk into the building without the indignity of a virtual body search. In jurisdictions where the public and attorneys are on the same line, this lack of trust in the defense bar is observed by jurors. If we stand in “Pari Delicto” before the bar; why are we unequal entering the courthouse? Cafeteria staff, I have also learned do not go through the metal detectors.
I have a global entry pass to enter the country, but not one to enter the courthouse. I recognize the importance of security, but not the importance of absurdity. Many of the attendants at the metal detectors, I have known for years; most are courteous and friendly, but they say they cannot cut you any slack because a supervisor is watching. They have their job to do and do it well, observing their directives faithfully. Why, however, are attorneys, who are in the courthouse almost on a daily basis treated as if we are a danger to the community?
Last year while on trial in federal court in Westchester, I was heading in for a jury selection day and was literally held up for more than forty minutes only to be reprimanded by the judge for being late.
Why has something not been done concerning this? I have practiced law for fifty-four years now. Why haven't the judges stood up for us? Is it unseemly to expect reciprocal respect and consideration? Where have the various bar groups been on this issue? Has there been any real discussion? Are we missing something?
This letter was written by Murray Richman and signed by John Iannuzzi and Robert Leighton. All three are criminal defense lawyers in New York.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAttorney Responds to Outten & Golden Managing Partner's Letter on Dropped Client
3 minute readLetter to the Editor: Law Journal Used Misleading Photo for Article on Election Observers
1 minute readNYC's Administrative Court's to Publish Some Rulings in the New York Law Journal Is Welcomed. But It Should Go Further
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250