XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.society.liberalism, talk.politics.guns
XPost: talk.politics.misc, alt.politics.economics

Supreme Court Justice Alito Slams Congress’ Efforts To Impose Code Of
Ethics On Court

"I am highly offended by ethics. They're as anti-conservative as it
goes."




Democratic lawmakers have moved forward with legislation that would force
the Supreme Court to adopt a code of ethics, as lower federal judges are already required to follow, with the Senate Judiciary Committee advancing long-shot legislation last week that would require the court to impose an ethics code and create a method for processing complaints if any justices violate it.

The push for the court to adopt a code of ethics came in response to a
series of ethics controversies that have come out involving the court’s justices—including Alito, who the New York Times reported may have leaked
the ruling in 2014’s Burwell v. Hobby Lobby to a conservative donor, and
who ProPublica reported accepted a luxury fishing trip from billionaire
Paul Singer without disclosing it, even as Singer’s hedge fund had
business before the court.

PROMOTED

In an interview with the Journal, Alito said he believes Congress doesn’t
have the power to force the court to impose an ethics code, saying
“Congress did not create the Supreme Court” and that while it might be “controversial” to say so, “No provision in the Constitution gives
[lawmakers] the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period.”

No other justices have commented on the pending legislation, and Alito
told the Journal while he “do[esn’t] think I should say” how his
colleagues feel about the issue, “it is something we have all thought
about.”

Legal experts criticized Alito’s comments to the Journal, with University
of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck saying it was “stunning” Alito
would make such a comment, and his position is “belied by 234 years of practice, and would turn the separation of powers totally on its head.”

Congress already regulates aspects of the Supreme Court beyond a code of ethics—such as passing the court’s budget, and imposing financial
disclosure requirements on justices—and Vladeck pointed to Article III,
Section 2 of the Constitution, which gives the Supreme Court jurisdiction
over cases “under such regulations as the Congress shall make.”

Forbes Daily: Get our best stories, exclusive reporting and essential
analysis of the day’s news in your inbox every weekday.

By signing up, you accept and agree to our Terms of Service (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions), and Privacy Statement.
Crucial Quote

??“I marvel at all the nonsense that has been written about me in the last year,” Alito told the Journal, saying that while “the traditional idea
about how judges and justices should behave is they should be mute” in the
face of criticism and let others defend them, “that’s just not happening.
And so at a certain point I’ve said to myself, nobody else is going to do
this, so I have to defend myself.”
What To Watch For

The ethics legislation in Congress is unlikely to become law, as
Republicans have heavily opposed the Democratic attempts to impose a code
of ethics on the court, characterizing it as a partisan campaign against
the conservative-leaning court as punishment for issuing rulings that
Democrats don’t like. The Washington Post and the Journal have reported
the Supreme Court has spent years considering whether to impose a code of ethics on itself, rather than Congress taking the lead, but justices have
been unable to reach a consensus on the issue and nothing has come to
fruition. The court has declined to publicly comment on its efforts to
impose a code of ethics, though Chief Justice John Roberts said in May he
was looking into how to make sure “that we as a court adhere to the
highest standards of conduct.”
Surprising Fact

Alito’s interview with the Journal was conducted in the newspaper’s op-ed section by attorney David Rivkin, who has litigated at the Supreme Court
and has a case before the court next term. Rivkin also represents
conservative legal activist Leonard Leo, who has been criticized for his
role in shaping the conservative-leaning Supreme Court, and responded on
Leo’s behalf to a recent congressional subpoena asking about Leo’s
relationship with Alito, after ProPublica reported Leo also attended
Singer’s luxury fishing trip. The request was part of a congressional investigation into the Supreme Court’s ethics issues, as Alito opposes.
Chief Critic

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who introduced the ethics bill, said on Twitter that Rivkin’s authoring of the Journal interview “shows how small
and shallow the pool of operatives is around this captured Court.” His
office directed Forbes to comments the senator made when the Judiciary Committee voted on the legislation, when Whitehouse noted “the Court’s financial disclosure requirements are a law, passed by Congress; its
recusal requirements are a law, passed by Congress; and the body that implements financial disclosure and code of conduct issues is the Judicial Conference, a body created by Congress. ... For decades the justices
themselves have never objected to, and have actually, repeatedly and
without complaint, complied with this structure, so even the Court has demonstrated it doesn’t believe that canard.”
Tangent

Alito’s interview with Rivkin for the Journal included a number of other comments about the court’s work. The justice said he and his conservative colleagues have “very serious differences” when it comes to how they
decide cases, with Justice Clarence Thomas giving less weight to precedent
than others, for instance, and Roberts “put[ing] a high premium on
consensus.” Alito said he puts an emphasis on historical context, noting
he didn’t believe same-sex marriage should have been legalized because
“nobody in 1868 thought that the 14th Amendment was going to protect the
right to same-sex marriage,” and that anti-discrimination statutes that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex shouldn’t include sexual orientation and gender identity because it was clear lawmakers hadn’t
intended that when passing laws in 1964. Alito also defended the court overturning Roe v. Wade and the federal right to an abortion, saying,
“Some decisions—and I think that Roe and [abortion rights case Planned Parenthood v. Casey] fell in this category—are so egregiously wrong, so
clearly wrong, that’s a very strong factor in support of overruling.” The court’s decisions on whether to overturn its precedent are a “judgment
call,” Alito said, noting reasons for not overturning previous cases
include being unsure whether a case should be overruled, not having
majority support for doing so or wanting lower courts or scholars to
address an issue first.
Key Background

Alito’s interview with the Journal comes after the justice previously used
the publication to defend himself against the ProPublica report about his
trip with Singer. The justice released an op-ed prior to the ProPublica
piece being published, in which he claimed he didn’t know about Singer’s connection to cases before the court or feel he had to disclose the trip, arguing he flew on Singer’s private jet in a seat that “would have
otherwise been vacant.” The Senate Judiciary Committee cited the report as
a reason for it to move forward with voting on Supreme Court ethics legislation, which had already been building momentum in light of multiple controversial reports about Thomas’ relationship with real estate
developer and GOP donor Harlan Crow. Thomas accepted decades worth of free luxury travel with Crow without disclosing it, along with other
transactions like selling real estate to Crow and having the magnate pay
for the justice’s grand-nephew’s private school tuition.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/07/28/supreme-court- justice-alito-slams-congress-efforts-to-impose-code-of-ethics-on-court/? sh=2a318ef94a93

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)