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.”

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      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.

        • DaleGribble88@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          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.

          • Pfeffy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            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.

            • cmbabul@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              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

      • jorp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        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.

      • snekerpimp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Copy/paste response. You do a lot of that with your comments. Like there is a set list of comments you respond from.

    • timespace@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      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.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      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.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yes. That’s how democracy is supposed to work: the candidate whom the most people want to win, wins.

          • timespace@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            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.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              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.

                • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  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.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    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?!

  • Supervisor194@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    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.

  • Bookmeat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    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.

  • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    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.

    • efstajas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      With the current state of American politics I would expect the following to happen:

      1. He lynches someone
      2. He gets convicted
      3. He brings a case claiming that a SCOTUS justice has criminal immunity for official acts, and that the lynching was clearly an official act
      4. The case escalates up to SCOTUS
      5. Him and his buddies rule in his favor and he walks free
    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      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)

          • MumboJumbo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            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.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      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

      • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        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.”

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          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.

          • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            “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.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              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.

  • Kumatomic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    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.

  • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Haha, liberals are scared that the façade of a “just” American legal system is going up in flames.