Legal experts say its time for the Supreme Court’s ethics code to grow some teeth
Legal experts are lamenting the lack of an enforceable judicial ethics code, with some calling for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s recusal, following a New York Times report that a symbol of the “Stop the Steal” movement to reject the 2020 election was flown outside Alito’s home in the wake of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Ten leading legal experts told Salon Friday that the conduct — the flying of an upside-down flag, a known symbol of the movement to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, at a justice’s home — appears to violate the Supreme Court’s own ethics code, adopted last last year, by creating an appearance of bias.
Those experts said it’s far past time for the nine justices who enjoy lifetime appointments to hold themselves to the highest ethical standards. But, they noted, the Supreme Court has shown itself reluctant to do so.
“The situation is out of control,” Richard Painter, a former White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush who worked with Justice Alito on his 2006 Senate confirmation, told Salon. “This is after the insurrection, so it’s really him weighing in, getting involved publicly in a dispute over the insurrection.”
the government has a dress code, but no ethics code.
fascinating.
This is a silly take. SCOTUS members have specific protection in the Constitution that needs to be dealt with. They have to be impeached. There’s no other legal remedy. Republicans are a cult and have broken the government, just as the funding fathers feared.
And the dress code is pageboy for CEOs
Every judge appointed by the orange sandwich is illegitimate and needs to be removed
Unfortunately, that’s extremely unlikely. The last Supreme Court Justice to be impeached was Samuel Chase in 1805. He was acquitted and continued to serve until his death.
They remain seated until they choose to step down or die. The average Justice serves for 16 years, but have served for as long as 34 years. Trump fucked a generation in one term.
Can’t Biden just expand it?
Expand what? The Supreme Court? That requires congressional action. It’s happened several times before.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S1-8-3/ALDE_00013559/
Expand what?
Alito’s O-ring.
Yes, but the political blowback from both parties would likely not be worth it. Especially because Republicans would immediately add double the amount Biden would, and it would very likely quickly grow into full bore shenanigans.
We can’t fight back ever because the other side might fight back even more. So let’s just capituate now. Story of Democrats my entire life. At best.
I’ve been convinced we were verging on a civil conflict of some kind for quite a while and terrified of the potential outcomes of that conflict, but I reached a point recently where I’m increasingly afraid that the consequences might actually be worse if there isn’t one. Our current system wasn’t designed to get major overhauls, we were supposed to make incremental changes to it as we went along but that hasn’t happened in 50 years
It’s like they don’t realize that having non-violent ways of affecting change are important because otherwise people will turn to violent ways after a certain point.
Copy/paste response. You do a lot of that with your comments. Like there is a set list of comments you respond from.
I’m as anti Trump as anyone, but I have some bad news for you - he was legitimately voted into office as the President and his appointments are therefore legitimate.
What McConnell did in blocking Obama’s appointment should be criminal. That BS needs to change.
he was legitimately voted into office as the President
…by the electoral college. Remember, he lost the popular vote.
Which is, unfortunately, how we elect the president in this country. He won.
And through foreign interference campaigns that should be legitimately taken as acts of war.
People keeping saying this like it means he didn’t win.
He won the game according to the games rules.
The games rules being unfair is a completely separate conversation
Same goes for the other ones to be nominated by a president who lost the vote for president (Alito and Roberts), and the other likely sex offender whose victim(s) never got a fair hearing or investigation, Clarence Brown.
Clarence Brown.
Clarence Thomas, as in uncle Tom.
That’s the one, yeah. The one who said that there’s no loss of dignity inherent to slavery.
I…what? Do you mean lost the popular vote?
Yes. That’s how democracy is supposed to work: the candidate whom the most people want to win, wins.
But that’s not how our system is setup. If you have a problem, talk or do something about the electoral college. But to pretend legally and legitimately elected presidents who won within the rules of the system as were defined at the time of their running are somehow illegitimate is some wonky revisionist history.
Nah, you’re only legitimate if the people chose you.
If you were installed by an archaic system from the 1700s designed to give empty land as much of a say as actual humans, even though the people preferred your opponent, then you’re not legitimate.
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical rural tradition.
And yet, you’re wrong aren’t you?
Nope. I just don’t automatically consider the system infallible and correct.
Legitimate presidents get elected, not appointed via an antidemocratic mechanism that hasn’t been excised because too many rich and powerful people benefit from it.
I’m a Law and Order Republican and I’m CONFUSED as to why people are so CONCERNED that the HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND is Corrupt. WHO CARES?!
Needs moar caps to be truly conservative.
But they are corrupt in the “correct way” so it’s fine. If they were progressives it would be nonstop news about how they need to be lynched.
Thomas AND Alito are unquestionably in Donald Von Shitzinpantz’s diaper.
In the olden days, if you didn’t have a term limit and you were needed to step down from your post you were assassinated.
There’s pretty much zero oversight for a supreme court justice, right? I’m kinda surprised he didn’t just lynch a few brown and/or gay people in his front yard because doing so would have equal consequence - none.
With the current state of American politics I would expect the following to happen:
- He lynches someone
- He gets convicted
- He brings a case claiming that a SCOTUS justice has criminal immunity for official acts, and that the lynching was clearly an official act
- The case escalates up to SCOTUS
- Him and his buddies rule in his favor and he walks free
Oh ,don’t worry.
We asked them if they need oversight. And every single SC judge said there’s no reason any of them need oversight.
Which is apparently enough to convince moderates Dems that we don’t need to do anything
The bill went along party lines out of committee, 11 Democrats in favor 10 Republicans against.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/senate-panel-set-vote-us-supreme-court-ethics-reform-2023-07-20/
Dead due on arrival though, due to unanimous republican opposition in both the senate and house (controlled by Republicans). Even if you wanted to argue for Democrats overturning the filibuster or something, it still wouldn’t solve the issue of the house. Anyways the point is, republicans are far more of a problem for judicial reform than your “moderate dems.”
Shh. You’re ruining their bOtH SiDeS narrative with inconvenient facts!
You know we don’t have to wait for the country to fall apart violently. There no shame in just calling it quits and everyone apply for sanctuary at their country of choice all at once.
Lol, fix your shit back home instead of moving elsewhere and fucking things up there as well, you guys live in the richest and most armed country in the world, you don’t have the excuse of not having resources at your disposition. I’ll welcome refugees with open arms if they come from a third world country, but from the USA? Fuck no.
Would you have said the same thing to people fleeing Germany before the Holocaust?
There’s a major difference when it’s people complaining that can’t be bothered to vote to make a difference.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_United_States_presidential_elections
Are you really sure it’s the same individuals?
Haha, liberals are scared that the façade of a “just” American legal system is going up in flames.
