Giving practical application to
Cornell Law Professor Maggie Gardner’s article
District Court en bancs;
inviting lawyers targeted by Trump executive orders to join in
an amicus curiae brief to support
a motion for en banc review in U.S. District Court, SDNY; and
proposing UNPRECEDENTED CITIZENS HEARINGS
that can turn universities, the media, and law firms into
a new powerhouse of American governance
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero_v_exec_orders&for_citizens_hearings.pdf
By
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial-Discipline-Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
tel. (718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com
To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder:
a. go to + New or Users >Add New; or
b. fill out the New User form at https://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/wp-admin/user-new.php.
Professor Maggie Gardner
Cornell Law School
Ithaka, NY 14853-4901
tel. (607)255-5346;
mgardner@cornell.edu, gj13@cornell.edu,
lyc8@cornell.edu,liz.flint@cornell.edu
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP,
Perkins Coie LLP,
Susman Godfrey LLP,
Jenner & Block LLP,
Harvard,
lawyers, law firms, and universities targeted by Trump administration executive orders,
and
Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,
Dear Professor Gardner, Wilmer Cutler, Perkins Coie, Susman Godfrey, Jenner & Block, Harvard, lawyers, law firms, universities, and Advocates,‡
1_This is a proposal to join forces to apply Professor Gardner’s article District Court en bancs[1] in a case pending in the U.S. District Court, SDNY, concerning healthcare insurers and other medical services and equipment providers’ plotting and committing with the complicity of Medicare abusive insurance claims evasive “delay, deny, defend” tactics:
Cordero
v.
Secretary of Health and Human Services, Medicare,
EmblemHealth [healthcare insurer],
Maximus Federal Services [reviewer of insurance claims denials],
et al. [including many of the top officers of
the Medicare Appeals Council and
the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA)];
docket no. 24-cv-9778-JAV;
filed in U.S. District Court, SDNY,
on 16 December 2024. [2 >SDNY:111]
2_I cited you, Prof. Gardner, and your article in my April 11 motion[3 >SDNY:251], which requests en banc review. With your amicus curiae[4 infra] support of it, you can capitalize on the enormous research and writing effort that you must have invested in your article.
3_Wilmer Cutler[5], Perkins Coie[6], Susman Godfrey[7], Jenner & Block[8], Harvard[9], and the lawyers, law firms, universities, and Advocates challenging the Trump administration are invited to join in one amicus brief or write their own amicus to benefit from the greater use of district court en bancs.
4_Indeed, my motion was addressed to SDNY Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain to request that she convene her district court en banc to resolve the conflict between an order of hers in my case and a subsequent one of the currently assigned judge, i.e., J. Annette A. Vargas; and decide other issues of public interest in these turbulent judicial times, e.g., whether:
a. a decision of a district court en banc, convened on a party’s or the judges’ motion, can more effectively persuade the public and a court of appeals than a decision of a single judge. If so, it would better resist arbitrary and capricious attacks by the current administration;
b. access to justice can become ‘speedier and more inexpensive’ in line with the purpose for the FRCP set forth in Rule 1[10] through review by a district court en banc compared with an appeal to an appeals court;
c. the sovereign and judicial immunity doctrines violate Articles II §4 and III §1; and Amendments XIV §1 and V of the Constitution, which provide for holding all officers of the United States, including those of the Executive branch and all judges, accountable so that against those officers We the People can secure “the equal protection of the laws” instead of being at the mercy of officers who arrogate to themselves an unconstitutionally superior place: Above the Law;
d. district court en bancs are mechanisms for judges to police themselves so that they can deter, detect, and correct their fellow judges’ abuse of discretion/power or incompetence;
e. characterizing mine as a test case in defense of civil rights and in the public interest, se it will benefit the 67.3 million[11] old, sick, and disabled insureds of Medicare, and the additional millions of non-Medicare insureds, the overwhelming majority of all of whom lack the physical and emotional stamina and knowledge of the law needed to defend their rights individually, e.g., through four levels of administrative appeals and climb to the fifth level of judicial review in a federal district court, never mind appealing to a circuit court;
f. such characterization will induce law, journalism, and IT/AI professionals as well as professors and students to use my case to expose providers of healthcare insurance, other services, and equipment who commit “delay, deny, defend” tactics, and those who cover for them.
5_It is in the same SDNY district court that federal criminal charges seeking the death penalty have been brought against Luigi Mangione for allegedly murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in NYC last December 4. Given the overwhelming public support for Mr. Mangione and the public outrage at those tactics, it is reasonable to expect that his trial will attract the national and international media.
6_As a result, this is the most opportune time to ask law firms, universities, and the media to investigate how district court en bancs can launch the reform of the judiciary by providing a speedier, affordable, and meaningful level of judicial review of cases, such as healthcare cases, where time is of the essence but insurers have an interest in dragging out the case until the insured is dead or too weak to press their claim anymore.
7_Courts of appeals do not provide that kind of review because they can dispose of appeals perfunctorily in reliance on the fact that the Supreme Court grants barely 1.5% of certiorari petitions.[12] Such unaccountability allows riskless abuse of power by healthcare insurers and providers, among others, and an individual judge presiding over a case.
8_We can contribute to the wider use of district court en bancs by making presentations thereon at law, journalism, and IT/AI schools, beginning with our local ones and our alma maters, as well as many other public interest entities.
9_At those presentations, we will propose concrete actions that the audience can undertake to expose the abusers, such as press releases, the publication of articles, press conferences, interviews, podcasts, townhall meetings, rallies; etc.
10_Moreover, we will propose unprecedented citizens hearings.
a. The citizens hearings will be held by media outlets and universities at their stations and auditoriums during the first semester of an academic year[13 >DCC:23].
b. They will afford people the opportunity to tell their story[14] of the abuse of power that they have suffered or witnessed.
c. They will allow people throughout the country to tell and listen to the stories in person and online.
d. The more stories are told and heard, the more people will be informed about the abuse of power and become outraged. Ever more will scream, “That happened to Me-Too!” They will be driven to ask to be allowed to tell their stories to vent that fire that is burning in their soul: the constant cry for justice and compensation[2 >SDNY:156§L]. Nothing oppresses the soul more harshly and persistently than the feeling of having been or being abused. The informed and outraged people will thus energize another self-reinforcing cycle of citizens hearings.
e. During the second academic semester[15 >DCC:31], the findings of the hearings will be established and the preparation undertaken for their presentation near the end of the semester at the first-ever national conference on abuse of power. It will be held simultaneously at several interconnected universities and news media networks.
f. At that conference, the findings of the citizens hearings will be presented in speeches, panel discussions, and the first edition of the Annual Report on Unaccountability and Abuse of Power in America.
g. The citizens hearings will be a rich source of materials for the proposed multidisciplinary summer internships of students.
h. There will also be offered semester-long multidisciplinary clinics for academic credit. Students will learn, among other things:
1) administrative law;
2) agency and social data gathering;
3) news gathering and reporting;
4) public relations and image managing;
5) the application of IT/AI to audit massive amounts of writings, speeches, and footage to detect patterns of unlawful meeting of the minds and coordinated abusive conduct;
6) representing clients before agencies and arguing motions;
7) developing journalistic sources;
8) auditing with IT/AI and detecting deep fakes;
9) legislative drafting;
10) lobbying legislative bodies;
11) strategizing and implementing a campaign of mass communication and demonstrations to develop and lead a national, nonpartisan Me-Too!-like civic movement for civil rights, accountability, liability, and reform;
12) the setting up of a new type of practice for handling a flood of motions to vacate decisions, remand for a new trial, and obtain compensation. This practice can be lucrative and build national name recognition for the practitioners;
13) working as a team inside an institution and among institutions in one or several states under the guidance of an editor or a lead attorney; etc.
i. In addition, the students will learn to do what abusees cannot do individually: prepare and initiate non-class aggregate actions and class actions, and multidistrict litigation in the public interest of exposing the nature, extent, and gravity of abuse of power by a big multistate entity[16 >¶¶8, 16] and collectively demanding compensation.
j. Students will gain unique hands-on experience that will impress job recruiters or enable them to open multidisciplinary boutiques upon graduation.
k. The success of the students and, of course, their professors can build up the reputation of their schools and increase admission applications and enrollment of better qualified applicants.
l. The citizens hearings’ findings of abuse of power coordinated and committed as institutionalized modus operandi should sufficiently inform and outrage the public to compel opportunistic and principled politicians, lest they be primaried or voted out of, or not into, office, to legislate transparency, accountability, and liability for, e.g., the healthcare industry.
m. The unprecedented citizens hearings have the potential for becoming a rallying point for abusees and reformers. They can set in motion the joint development of academe and the media as a powerhouse that holds accountable and liable private and public entities so big that We the People separated into millions of individuals cannot fight.[16 >¶¶7, 15; 8, 16]
n. The citizens hearings can lead to the creation of the Institute of Unaccountability Reporting and Reform Advocacy, to be attached to a preeminent university or news network, and engaged in research, publishing, classroom and public education, consulting, litigation, lobbying, etc.
11_This proposal is realistic:
a. multistate law firms from several states have represented Harvard;
b. hundreds of universities as well as professors have added their names and efforts to challenge Trump administration executive orders;
c. on April 5 over 1,200 demonstrations in all 50 states were reportedly held in communities across the country to protest Trump administration actions[17] and more have been held every Saturday since then[18]; etc.
12_In the same vein, my website at Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org has become a rallying point. There I post some of my law and business articles, the product of my professional research and writing, and strategic thinking. They have attracted so many webvisitors and impress them so favorably that as of 28 April 2025, the number of subscribers was 55,117+.
13_Some of my articles have been added to my three-volume study of abuse of power, titled and downloadable thus:
Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power:
Pioneering the news and publishing field of
judicial unaccountability reporting* † ♣
14_I offer to make a presentation to you and your guests via video conference or, if my expenses and fee are paid, in person outside NY City on the reformative potential of district court en bancs and their interplay with unprecedented citizens hearings. Thus, I look forward to your call to schedule it.
Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money
Put your money
where your outrage at abuse of power and
quest for justice are.
Support
the professional law research and writing, and
strategic thinking conducted at
Judicial Discipline Reform
DONATE
by making a deposit or an online transfer through
either the Bill Pay feature of your online account or
other payment facility, such as Zelle,
from your account
to TD Bank account # 43 92 62 52 45, routing # 260 13 673;
or Citi Bank account # 4977 59 2001, routing # 021 000 089.
Dare shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and even enter it…as
a Champion of Justice.
[1] District Court en bancs, Professor Maggie Gardner, vol 90 Fordham Law Review 1541 (2022); https://fordhamlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Gardner_March.pdf
[2] Complaint at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ALJ/24-12-15DrRCordero-v-Medicare_EmblemHealth_et_al.pdf >SDNY:111
[3] Id. >SDNY:251
[4] The SDNY Local Rules, https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/rules, do not provide for amicus briefs. But some guidance can be derived from its rules on motions:
Rule 6(b). On all civil motions…
(1) the moving papers must be served by the moving party on all other parties that have appeared in the action,
(2) any opposing or response papers must be served within 14 days after service of the moving papers, [my motion was e-filed and emailed on Friday, 11 April] and
(3) any reply papers must be served within seven days after service of the answering papers. In computing periods of days, refer to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. [FRCP]
This tends to indicate that at any time after 14 +7 days after my filing on April 11= Thursday, May 2, the District Court, SDNY, could decide my motion. If an amicus brief reached it after that date, the amicus might not be taken into consideration in deciding my motion to convene the district court en banc. This means that time is of the essence.
Consider Local Rule 7.1. Form and Length of Briefs, Motions, and Other Papers:
(b)(1) all text must be 12-point type or larger, except for text in footnotes which may be 10-point type;
(2) all documents must have at least one-inch margins on all sides;
(3) all text must be double-spaced, except for headings, text in footnotes, or block quotations, which may be single-spaced.
(c) Length of Memoranda of Law. If filed by an attorney or pre-pared with a computer, briefs in support of and in response to a motion (except for motions for reconsideration) may not exceed 8,750 words, and reply briefs may not exceed 3,500 words.
In the same vein is “Local Rule 6.3. Motions for Reconsideration…if filed by an attorney or prepared with a computer, briefs in support of and in response to a motion may not exceed 3,500 words”. FRAP “Rule 29. Brief of an Amicus Curiae”, http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28us c_Civ_App_Evi_Rules.pdf, appears too technical to be imported wholesale into a jurisdiction that has no formal en banc mechanism.
On the contrary, at this early stage of the proposed regular use of en bancs, district courts should be encouraged to liberally and imaginatively use them to attain the purpose set by FRCP 1 when ‘district courts construe, administer, and employ FRCP’: “to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding”. See my motion[3 >SDNY:260§D]. Why review by a district court en banc is the proper course of action.
In conclusion, you could write an amicus brief of no more than 3,500 words and file it as soon as possible to give practical application to your article and support my motion for CJ Swain and/or the other judges in her court to convene en banc to review and grant my requested relief as they treat this as a test case in the public interest.
[5] Wilmer Cutler; https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/045111284993
[6] Perkins Coie; https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278290/gov .uscourts.dcd.278290.1.0.pdf
[7] Susman Godfrey; https://www.susmangodfrey.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Complaint-4.11.25.pdf
[8] Jenner & Block; https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/045111284768
[9] Harvard; https://www.harvard.edu/research-funding/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/04/Harvard-Funding-Freeze-Order-Complaint.pdf
[10] http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28usc_Civ_App_Evi_Rules.pdf
[11] https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/medicare/medicare-statistics/
[12] 2024 Year End Report on the Federal Judiciary by Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.; https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2024year-endreport.pdf >page 10
[13] Cf. Syllabus of DeLano Case Course; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/DCC/DrRCordero_DeLano_Case_Course.pdf >DCC:23
[14] http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_method_for_writing_your_story.pdf
[15] Syllabus for preparing the conference; endnote 13 >DCC:31
[16] Blurbs and abstracts of articles on abuse of power: an abusive big commercial entity; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-blurbs&abstracts_of_cases&articles.pdf >¶¶7, 15; ¶¶8, 16
[17] Photos: See demonstrators around the country rally in ‘Hands Off!’ protests: The Picture Show; NPR staff; https://www.npr.org/sections/the-picture-show/2025/04/05/g-s1-58479/photos-see-hands-off-protests-trump-musk
[18] https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=were+demonstrations+held+against+ trump+and+his+policies+on+april+26&qpvt=were+demonstrations+held+against+Trump+and+his+policies+on+April+26&form=IGRE&first=1