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.”
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?
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
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.
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.
Again, it’s the same reply to the same comment to the same post in politics. Is it wrong to have the same opinion when I see the same comment only minutes later? You made the initial comment that I replied to in both places.
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 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
Thomas AND Alito are unquestionably in Donald Von Shitzinpantz’s diaper.
Putin’s diaper*
It’s all the same diaper
It’s like those Russian nesting dolls, but it’s nesting diapers.
Matryoshka diaper
Alito’s response: “Ha ha, fuck you. I do what I want.”
You can call for America’s Mullahs to do things, but they won’t do them because they don’t have to.
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.
Removed by mod
What a coward. The country can go fuck itself, so just own up to it you pussy. But no no, he’s all “my wife did it.” So not only can we go fuck ourselves, we’re also rock stupid.
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.
In theory he can be impeached.
In practice, he can’t be impeached.
While I get what you mean, they aren’t immune to prosecution for acts outside of their role. He would hopefully still get arrested and charged for lynching people. (Hopefully)
Tried, convicted, appealed all the way up to his own court, conviction overturned.
I mean, his fellow judges might be corrupt enough to do so, but he couldn’t sit on the judging panel for that.
Could he not? I’m genuinely interested, because I was under the impression that there wasn’t anything that could force the justices to recuse themselves.
Anything that could directly effect them financially or if there is a reason that could cause bias is really when they are supposed to recuse. He lied and said his wife’s actions in Jan 6 didn’t effect his judgement on that case but no one could accept murder charges not effecting him financially in any way.
But Clarence Thomas accepted gifts from people who then argued in front of the Supreme Court without recusing himself without facing any consequences, so is there anything to stop it?
I understand how you could compare the two situations but I can also see how they can lie about the gift being unrelated, where them being the charged being prosecuted can’t really lie his way out of showing up. Also, it would look ridiculous for him to walk back and forth across the room, he’d need a rolly chair.
They don’t recuse themselves if their wife was part of an insurrection and there are no consequences for that.
Couldn’t he? What rule prevents him? Like, it’s the most obvious situation ever where he shouldn’t be allowed to, but it’s there an actual law somewhere saying so?
He’d get a blanket pardon for the duration of his appointment to that date. It wouldn’t even go to trial.
Oh please… Lol
In practice they are immune.
What was the case where charges were brought for lynching someone against a supreme Court judge? I must have missed that one
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!
Wouldn’t that have to be an act of Congress, which is not controlled by the “moderates Dems”
You think “making SC justices accountable” wouldn’t get more Dems elected?
FDR was progressive enough and voters knew he was trying to help, that people got him that kind of supermajority.
Granted, the “moderate” Dems still stopped him from passing universal healthcare 80 years ago, but at that point voters would have eventually replaced them.
Instead the “moderates” took power and convinced voters trying is pointless, and now they pretend to be surprised when turnout is bad.
That’s kind of the whole rub with “moderate” Dems. They have to walk a right rope where just enough people are politically engaged to beat Republicans, but not so many that theres no excuse for not doing shit.
It’s like when that NBA guy was betting for his team to win, but not beat the spread. So he’d make “mistakes” in the game and fake injuries.
You lose more when you’re not trying to win by as much as you can. But if you get more money (campaign donations from billionaires and corporations) it’s what you care more about than if the team gets a W.
“You think “making SC justices accountable” wouldn’t get more Dems elected?”
Not sure where you got that from? I was just saying the Dems don’t control the house, and the house would have to make those accountability guidelines.
Is Dem leadership out there on the bully pulpit talking about how many more seats we need and where we should focus?
No?
They’re not? They just stopped talking about?
Like, this shit is literally what party leaders are supposed to be doing, instead Hakeem Jefferies are Chuck Schumer are running around talking about how funding Israel’s genocide is so important and painting peaceful protesters as the real villains. As is Biden.
The president and Dem leaders in the Senate and House don’t represent the priorities of their voters.
Oh this guy again. Yeah, it’s all the Democrats’ fault. Every time, for everything.
lol “creating an appearance of bias.”
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.
a silly but rather accurate statement, though somewhat goofy.
And the dress code is pageboy for CEOs
whoops
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.
So based on how things have gone so far with the fascist in chief, we can expect no consequences at all, or that he will die of old age before any such consequences can be agreed upon. Sound about right?
Disbar the bitch
What would that do? You don’t even need a law degree to be a judge.
Yes you do need a law degree to be a judge. Unless you live way up in appalacchia
Most judicial positions don’t have a degree requirement - including all federal judges.
There are over 2,000 judicial positions without law license requirements in Texas alone (JOP, Municipal Judges, County Judges, and Probationary Court Judges).
Are there qualifications to be a Justice? Do you have to be a lawyer or attend law school to be a Supreme Court Justice?
The Constitution does not specify qualifications for Justices such as age, education, profession, or native-born citizenship. A Justice does not have to be a lawyer or a law school graduate, but all Justices have been trained in the law.
The constitution doesnt appoint judges
Who are you talking to? Nobody has the power to do that
Congres and house do. Too bad the votes aren’t there
Who are you talking to? Nobody has the power to do that
How embarrassing for you. If he is a member of a Bar association, he can be disbarred.
Yeah, like people in this country would listen to experts. That’s basically admitting you don’t know everything already.
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.
Nah, no need to leave this land and its resources to the most evil.
Already on it.
For anyone who is seriously considering this you need to look into the term “expat” if you didn’t know the word
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?
The people wanting to leave at the moment? They might vote, they still have the power to push those who don’t to do so instead of trying to move elsewhere. Hell, by leaving they only make things worse for those who stay by making those who want to improve things a smaller % of the population.
At the moment a majority of the population is pro choice in the USA, but seeing that right attacked isn’t enough to make more than a minority of those under 35 go out and vote, they’re exactly the people concerned!
Now you’ve got people that would otherwise vote Democrat saying they won’t vote for Biden because of Palestine, as if that doesn’t pave the way for Trump and as if he would be any better.
Progressives don’t actually get involved in politics, you’ve got very few Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez compared to the number of Romney and Greene.
Conservatism should be a disqualifier for holding positions of authority. Conservatives are immoral and there is no place in a modern civilization for anything they stand for.
Trump has so many pawns in place like this guy and this cultists followers. This is terrible but they won’t do anything about it.
