Sherrilyn IfillI’m a civil rights lawyer. I don’t want to practice before a Court that’s compromised. I want a fair Court. Expansion would make this particular Court more ideologically balanced. Agree. But w/o a real, enforced ethics infrastructure, there will be 18 justices not fully disclosing financials, not compelled to recuse, praying in chambers w/their own faith leaders, going on trips w/groups filing briefs in cases before them, owning stock in indiv companies whose interests are before the Court.
Dan Cline@ifilljustice How would an ethical code for the Supreme Court be enforced?
WndlB@dancline @ifilljustice And by whom?
KProfsBlog@dancline @ifilljustice Alas, there's the rub. Either the Chief would have to enforce the rules (would he?) or it would be grounds for impeachment (not gonna happen).
Jim Doppke@KProfsBlog @dancline @ifilljustice There are obstacles to creating a SCOTUS-focused institution comparable to attorney disciplinary agencies. But Congress could start small w/calls to end certain practices (reserved seats at oral arg, chambers visits, justice attendance at Historical Society events). If unheeded, pass legislation about it even w/o enforcement mechanism. The infrastructure can begin to be formed with these steps and further crafted along the way.
@jimdoppke Justice attendance at historical society events? Why is that a problem? I would love for the Justices to attend meetings of the AHA or the OAH or, better still, the American Society for Legal History. What is your concern?
@KProfsBlog referring to the SCOTUS Historical Society that was brought up in the NYT story. I realize that trying to prohibit or regulate that kind of thing may be problematic but I also see it as a way in which the justices became vulnerable to the influence of donors to the Society (which was Schenk's aim at the time).
Chriz@jimdoppke @KProfsBlog Citizens United
@jimdoppke
It's a challenge. Justices have clerks that are going to get involved in legal organizations. They need to be allowed to stay in contact with their clerks, but they must avoid contact when those clerks or their organizations have cases pending before the Court. How do ethics rules for lower federal courts deal with this?
It's a challenge. Justices have clerks that are going to get involved in legal organizations. They need to be allowed to stay in contact with their clerks, but they must avoid contact when those clerks or their organizations have cases pending before the Court. How do ethics rules for lower federal courts deal with this?
Raptor@KProfsBlog @dancline @ifilljustice
Elected Positions
Term Limits (or the ability to remove appointments by public consensus)
no party affiliation allowed
PerryM ✅This is the sticky wicket! You can't have Rules of any kind without enforcement procedures.
My suggestion would be to have the Justices from the US Court of Appeals rule (vote) on violations, including dismissal.
Having a SCOTUS Chief Justice without the ability to discipline Justices for Rule or Ethical violation is not workable. SO .. Allow him/her to charge an errant Justice!
It would not work to have the Legislative or Executive Branches bring charges.
My 2₵ !
@PerryM @ifilljustice But, shouldn’t we be concerned about granting that level of power to a Chief Justice? What if punishments were meted out only to those justices who disagreed with the political views of the Chief Justice?
Dan, that's a possibility, or ignoring charges for errant Justices that he/she agrees with!
I am reminded of John Roberts who worries openly about the failing credibility of "his" Court. His record also shows that is probably the least political on the present Court. I also see open frustration that he can't do anything about it!
I would be very interested in other options... suggestions?