Question

should matthew hale be allowed to practice law for his races view? by denying him the license to practice law because he overtly admitted to this racist views, did the bar committee violate his freedom of expression?

Answer 1

INTRODUCTION -

Matthew Hale, has been the case of its kind wherein he was a graduate of Southern Illinois University School of Law and has also cleared the examination and applied for admission. However he was was a racist activities before and after the leadership of world church, so bar and law school dined for his admission saying that he has unfit character

EXPLAINATION -

such acts done by law school and examination bar was highly criticised by all as HE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PRACTICE LAW AFTER BEING ELIGIBLE BY CLEARING.

BAR, can do so just cause of there beliefs in fact the court itself believed that a person's ideologies cannot make him/her unfit to practice law, this is NOT like taking there freedom because no person shall seek to subvert the rights of particular class of person but unless is against national peace and law

Above all, the legal studies is all about justice given irrespective to the person's class, color, race, creed and such a action committed by the court is itself a spot made on the justice committee

For this FIRST AMENDMENT was done it said that racism is just an abstract belief and a person believing in it does not mean will implement it in professional life also.But such beliefs could alter his process of analysing and proceedings for any case

CONCLUSION -

These are from ARTICLE - V, wherein bar was held that however the bar was said that they did NO WRONG, a person who has beliefs and also was ACTIVIST can can dangerous and violate anti -discrimation laws of nation, and having such in lawering could violate justice laws. " No one person can serve two masters" either will love one and hate other ultimatly will serve one and leave other.

Sir/Mam kindly please rate the answer and do feel free to ask in case of doubt