European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - May 11, 1991, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Saturday May 11, 1991 the staffs and stripes Page 13 commentary James Kilpatrick the . Supreme court lost its collective temper this week. Instead of preserving its usual Majestic image the court took on the aspects of a petulant Monarch in a tin plate Crown. This kind of thing does the court no Good. What happened a convict in Washington state John Robert demos jr., got under the thin skin of chief Justice William Rehnquist. His Royal Eminence then rounded up five other members of the court and together the big six fashioned a new Rule to deter the filing of a a frivolous or a a malicious pleadings. Petitioner demos wont be petitioning any More. The demos Case marked the third time in two years that the court has fretted publicly about the supposed Burden of petitions filed a in forma pauperism i.e., in the manner of poor people. Since this term of court began in october More than 3,200 pauper cases have been filed an increase of roughly 20 percent Over the preceding term. In order to file As a pauper without paying a $300 docketing fee a Petitioner must swear that he has no significant assets. The overwhelming majority of such pleas come from prison inmates desperate for any Avenue that might Lead to a new trial. Probably 99 percent of the petitions Are instantly recognizable As legally worthless. Poor petitioners rarely succeed in leaping Over the hurdles of High court protocol. In 1957, convicted kidnapper Caryl Chessman won reconsideration of his death sentence. In 1963, in a landmark Case Clarence Earl Gideon won the right of an indigent defendant to have counsel in a felony trial. These arc exceptions. Far More typically the court brushes off the a in forma pauperism petitions with a terse order denying review. That was what had happened repeatedly to a pest Ferous fellow named Jessie Mcdonald. He had been convicted in Tennessee of obtaining title to an automobile under false pretences. He Felt he had been the victim of a bum rap. Between 1976 and 1989 he a a relentlessly bombarded the High court with 73 petitions for appeals rehearing and stays. The annoyance thoroughly irritated Rehnquist amp co. Over the Strong objections of justices Brennan Marshall Blackmun and Stevens the majority two years ago directed the clerk to deny any further indigent petitions from Mcdonald asking for an extraordinary writ. Brennan criticized his colleagues for an a unwise unprecedented and potentially dangerous  he predicted the court under Rehnquist would take further Steps to discourage a poor Petitioner. Brennan was an excellent Prophet. Four months ago the Rehnquist six jumped on Michael Sindram of Maryland. This litigious fellow began his career As a plaintiff by filing a malpractice suit against i doctor who had done minor surgery on his Fingernail. He sued a garage that had done repair work on his car. When he was fined $35 for speeding he vowed an eternal Pursuit of Justice. As an indigent he filed 42 petitions and motions in the Sii preme court. Thirteen of these were virtually identical petitions for rehearing. On Jan. 7 the court rail out of patience. Terming sin dramas motions a both frivolous and  the big six Marvin Gottlieb . No Justice . Suppaa the Couer appeals a paupers banned him from filing further indigent petitions for extraordinary Relief. It was against that background that the court last week jumped on John Robert demos or. Rehnquist a position is that frivolous filings waste the courts time and reduce its efficiency. This is doubtless True but it is also True As Justice Marshall has said that the inconvenience to the court is a greatly  the preparation and mailing of rejection notices is no trick at All. Marshall also has pointed out a major inconsistency the courts new Rule formally adopted last week applies Only to certain petitions filed by poor applicants. Well to do petitioners also file frivolous pleadings. A in closing its doors today to another indigent litigant a said Marshall a the court moves Ever closer to the Day when it leaves an indigent litigant with a meritorious claim out in the cold. And with each Barrier that it places in the Way of indigent litigants and with each instance in which it castigates such litigants for having a abused the system a the court can Only reinforce in the hearts Anil minds of our society a less fortunate members the unsettling message that their pleas Are not Welcome Here. I  and Justice Kilpatrick meaning me joins in that dissent. Petulance and impatience ill become the highest court in our  Universal Pross Syndicate nothing new about new look democrats Cleveland the democratic leadership Council is an organization dedicated to moving the democratic party rightward to the presidency. The Case that such a move would work is weak. A Michael Dukakis after All ran a dec candidacy in 1988. Bill Clinton the president of dec was the Man who nominated Dukakis. Dukakis was Clinton a kind of Guy a problem solving activist governor who knew How to work with business people and other non . Moreover candidate Dukakis rejected the ways of his predecessor Walter Mon Dale at every stage which is exactly what the dec types said the party had to do. Dukakis did no to get closely tied with the interest groups. Did no to talk taxes or spending. Did t really say anything controversial. Ran away from the word Liberal. Picked a Southern moderate for the ticket. Every think. In another year a with things going badly enough for the country that the incumbent party  change the subject with such silly irrelevancies As Willie Horton and the Flag a the dec approach might have worked. But then so would other approaches. \ if Drikakis had won the dec people would be saying a see. We told you our Way would  instead they Are pretending to be something new. Its not their Only pretence. The Dlce a leaders insisted that they picked Cleveland for their convention because Cleveland is a a comeback City full of democrats after All the dec is about a democratic comeback. It All fits together so nicely. Its nonsense. Why would democrats highlight the comeback of a City that came Back under a Republican mayor George Voinovich the dec got a Good offer from Cleveland including Money from locally based corporations which Are trying to gel Cleveland a reputation As a convention town. But the. Dec leaders May also have figured that the one Way to get some northerners to come to their convention was to hold it where the northerners Are. All the big visible driving forces in the convention were southerners Bill Clinton the governor of Arkansas sen. John Breaux of Louisiana and sen. Chuck Robb of Virginia. Plenty of other big name southerners were around. The Only non Southern non Ohio senator or governor noticed hanging around for the duration was sen. Joseph Lieber Man of Connecticut. Even most of the ohioans put space Between themselves and the Dlce. Atty. Gen. Lee Fisher and . Rep. Mary Rose Oakar criticized the group Lor being dominated by White males. Sen. John Glenn and Oakar went from a dec session to a labor Union occasion. Where they rejected the Dlce a position tin Trade with Mexico. As if the North Slack of interest in the Dlly weren t humiliation enough the conventioneers had to devote a substantial  their Energy to disposing of the ultimate charge that they Are republicans in disguise. At one typical Point Clinton who was presiding said he had been asked to describe just exactly How the dec Duea Tion proposal differs from president Bush a. He did so with some apparent exasperation at the question. And it turns out there Are indeed differences. Don t ask what they Are 15 minutes later a journalist can to remember them. Robb Laid out the situation clearly if plaintively. A we Are not republicans a he insisted. It rang somehow of �?o1 am not a  c cot hums Rio