DATE: Thursday, July 3, 1997                TAG: 9707030645

SECTION: FRONT                   PAGE: A1   EDITION: FINAL 

SOURCE: BY BILL SIZEMORE, STAFF WRITER 

DATELINE: NORFOLK                           LENGTH:   62 lines

COALITION ATTORNEY SCOLDED BY JUDGE FOR ``SILLY'' BRIEF

Free speech ran up against judicial decorum in a Norfolk courtroom Wednesday and, as usual, the judge had the last word.

An intemperately phrased legal brief submitted by an attorney for the Christian Coalition in a politically charged federal lawsuit brought him a stern lecture, a history lesson and an unorthodox punishment.

The coalition is being sued by the Federal Election Commission, which has accused the Chesapeake-based religious lobby of improperly involving itself in partisan politics. The FEC has subpoenaed coalition financial records from four accounting firms.

Seeking to quash the subpoenas, Virginia Beach lawyer David N. Ventker fired back with a sizzling brief.

The FEC ``has been on a continuing crusade to strangle the First Amendment to the Constitution and to establish itself as the ultimate arbiter of what citizens in a free society may and may not do in supporting candidates seeking election to federal office,'' Ventker wrote.

The federal agency has displayed ``an arrogance more fitting to a ministry in a czarist court than an agency of a democratically elected government,'' he wrote.

It was all too much for U.S. Magistrate Judge Tommy E. Miller.

At the outset of a hearing in federal court Wednesday afternoon, Miller called Ventker before him for a tongue-lashing.

``The tone of this brief is unprofessional, immature and just plain silly,'' Miller said, adding that perhaps Ventker should brush up on Russian history.

For instance, he said, Czar Peter I was known as the chief executioner for hundreds of hapless Russians who, on the way to their deaths, bore such tortures as being grilled over a slow fire and the flesh torn off their bodies. In contrast, he said, the coalition faces a legal action initiated by a majority vote of a bipartisan government commission.

``If I were a teacher in junior high school, I'd require you to write an essay,'' Miller said.

Instead, he ordered Ventker and anyone else who helped him write his brief to read the Virginia State Bar's principles of professional courtesy and write him a letter stating they had done so.

Then, after some brief arguments, he denied most of the coalition's motions.

Three of the four accounting firms were ordered to hand over the subpoenaed documents by July 11.

Ventker argued that releasing the documents sought by the FEC would be tantamount to giving up trade secrets. For instance, he said, the documents might include the group's mailing list, which cost thousands of dollars to compile.

But, Miller interjected, didn't the coalition just admit renting part of its mailing list to Oliver North's 1994 Republican Senate campaign?

Yes, Ventker said, but North paid full market value for the list. ``We don't hand it out to just anybody,'' he said.

But Miller said he could find no legal precedent for the claim that a nonprofit organization is entitled to protection of trade secrets.

The FEC lawsuit, filed nearly a year ago, alleges that the coalition's get-out-the-vote efforts and voter guides are coordinated with Republican campaigns and constitute illegal contributions.

Coalition lawyers couldn't say immediately whether Miller's decision would be appealed.

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu