Justice Alito on Supreme Court regulation

[Fantine]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/30/politics/chris-murphy-samuel-alito-supreme-court-ethics-cnntv/index.html

Conservative justices' complaints that congressional oversight is unconstitutional will backfire in the long run, I think.

We have heard some horrific stories of lavish gifts and benefits from conservative 'friends,' many of whom are involved with cases before the Supreme Court.

#1 offender (or beneficiary?) is Justice Thomas. Half-million dollar private plane vacations over twenty years, mother's house purchased and renovated--while she lives there rent free, beloved grandnephew gets free tuition at $72K per year prep school. Wow!

#2 offender is Justice Roberts, whose wife earned $10 million in commissions recruiting lawyers for firms that frequently appear before the Supreme Court.

#3 offender is Justice Alito, for accepting private plane Alaskan fishing trips.

This has damaged the reputation of a very unpopular (and unbalanced) Supreme Court. Progressives and moderates can now feel justified in their complaints about the 6-3 court since their million dollar "gifts" have been revealed. "Not only do they make bad decisions, but they're crooks," liberals think.

And the more they get on their high horses and defend their special privileges, the more they stay in the headlines and the more dishonest they seem.

They should just let Congress force them to be honest and live on their salaries (of $275K for five months' work) like the rest of Americans have to.

 

[Pommer]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/30/politics/chris-murphy-samuel-alito-supreme-court-ethics-cnntv/index.html

Conservative justices' complaints that congressional oversight is unconstitutional will backfire in the long run, I think.

We have heard some horrific stories of lavish gifts and benefits from conservative 'friends,' many of whom are involved with cases before the Supreme Court.

#1 offender (or beneficiary?) is Justice Thomas. Half-million dollar private plane vacations over twenty years, mother's house purchased and renovated--while she lives there rent free, beloved grandnephew gets free tuition at $72K per year prep school. Wow!

#2 offender is Justice Roberts, whose wife earned $10 million in commissions recruiting lawyers for firms that frequently appear before the Supreme Court.

#3 offender is Justice Alito, for accepting private plane Alaskan fishing trips.

This has damaged the reputation of a very unpopular (and unbalanced) Supreme Court. Progressives and moderates can now feel justified in their complaints about the 6-3 court since their million dollar "gifts" have been revealed. "Not only do they make bad decisions, but they're crooks," liberals think.

And the more they get on their high horses and defend their special privileges, the more they stay in the headlines and the more dishonest they seem.

They should just let Congress force them to be honest and live on their salaries (of $275K for five months' work) like the rest of Americans have to.

I’ve been letting this story play out a bit longer before I actually have enough to form a coherent (or “coherent for Pommer”) opinion.
Courts that are politicized (by either “side”) tend to choose who’s holding the purse strings at the moment and we get bad law.
This would be a snake bite for our nation. [Edit] The left has to let this slide, for now, the integrity of the court is more important. If a justice says that they can be entertained and treated nice by someone who has business before their Court (SCOTUS) and can rule impartially, we have to take them at their word. The left has to “blink”. Or it’s all over. It’s that simple.

 

[FireDragon76]

In Latin American Banana Republics, the justices used to be bought and paid for, too.

This kind of behavior should be unacceptable in any society that wants transparent and accountable government. The US Courts need codes of ethics that preclude taking substantial gifts from interests in cases they hear.

Alito and other conservative "textualists" are wrong. The Supreme Court is not an independent branch of government. Congress is the first branch of our Republic, not the Courts. It is Congress's job to determine what is and isn't federal law, including what laws apply to Supreme Court justices.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

All of this corruption shows how evil the love of money is. Alito evidently has not read the Constitution Article 3 section 2 that states.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Now I am old enough to remember a very prescient (if not prophetic) song back in 1973 by the O'Jays that describes what people will do for the love of money. For your entertainment listen.

 

[FireDragon76]

All of this makes naked and bare something that some pundits on the Left have been saying for years, ever since Citizens United. The Supreme Court has just become a front-group for lobbyists and political ideologues, and they are barely pretending anymore that isn't the case. Indeed, Alito seems highly brazen in this regard, as if he's boasting or gloating about the unbridled power of his office. We need to take back Congress so we can hold the Supreme Court accountable.

 

[FreeinChrist]

This is a good article:

Congress Has the Authority to Regulate Supreme Court Ethics - and the Duty

From oaths to retirement to impeachment, Congress already regulates the high court, and it's time for stronger safeguards against corruption.

www.brennancenter.org

Alito said something about the fact that the "organized bar" of the judiciary usually steps up to defend the SCOTUS but aren't this time. He should wonder why that is. Perhaps it is because there is a demand that the lower courts have ethical standards they must maintain, and the SCOTUS does not? That the SCOTUS is not held to the same bar as the lower courts?

 

[Pommer]

This is a good article:

Congress Has the Authority to Regulate Supreme Court Ethics - and the Duty

From oaths to retirement to impeachment, Congress already regulates the high court, and it's time for stronger safeguards against corruption.

www.brennancenter.org

Alito said something about the fact that the "organized bar" of the judiciary usually steps up to defend the SCOTUS but aren't this time. He should wonder why that is. Perhaps it is because there is a demand that the lower courts have ethical standards they must maintain, and the SCOTUS does not? That the SCOTUS is not held to the same bar as the lower courts?

The Constitution assumes that the people who are appointed to the Supreme Court are so honorable that even conduct that would result in disciplinary-action if done by a Lower court Justice is “okay” because they’re just THAT honorable!
Congress is allowed to “set guidelines” for Roberts to follow when he drafts an Official Ethics Policy.