Caesar's wife.
The Supreme Court needs to clean up its act.
Chief Justice Roberts should take clear, bold, publicly-visible action.
Our country needs a Supreme Court whose decisions have credibility. Supreme Court Justices must be--and appear to be--scrupulous in avoiding partisanship and conflicts of interest. It isn't too much to ask for. It is the minimum.
Court decisions need the consent, perhaps grudging, even of people unhappy with their decisions. A foundation for that is the personal behavior of the judges. They must avoid being unfair and partisan or appearing that way.
It just looks bad when a judge at any level accepts gifts from anyone. Anyone. It looks especially bad if the gift-giver is a major donor to a political party with interests that come before the court.
It just looks bad when one has a spouse actively working with partisans to do something of enormous consequence -- e.g. urging state legislators to overturn an election -- under any circumstances. It is especially so when that issue will come before one's own court.
It just looks bad when one's spouse is employed by a political party's House leadership. It looks especially bad when one fails to disclose it on the annual forms sent to Justices that instruct them to list the family's sources of income.
It just looks bad when there is uncontroverted news reporting that wealthy people with interests before the court get tipped off about pending decisions over dinners with Justices.
It just looks bad when justices make a sharp reversal of former precedent on controversial issues. Sometimes it must be done. Sometimes it should be done. I accept that reality. But that is when the process of appointing and confirming justices most needs to have avoided the appearance of partisanship.
Chief Justice Roberts has a challenge and opportunity. He should rise to the occasion.
Supreme Court Justices need to adhere to the highest standards of probity. They don't. They are setting an example of lawlessness. Life tenure does not give them special license. It gives them special obligation.
Supreme Court Associate Justices earn $274,200/year. The Chief Justice earns $286,700. A great majority of Americans consider this a princely sum. I have a different view. I recognize that within the circles of prosperous and powerful people, it is a pittance. Their current value as a speaker at an organization dwarfs that income. Their opportunities are great. The temptations must be enormous. Of course billionaires with jets and yachts want to give them hospitality; they have power
Call me naive. Call me a goody-goody. But I think that the Justices--all of them--need to say goodbye to all that. There is a price for the power they hold. They have power to shape America's laws and culture. In exchange, they must be conspicuous examples of probity. They must tell their spouses that they cannot take jobs that look like a conflict of interest. Is that unfair to the spouse? That's OK. If the spouse isn't on board, then the Justice should resign to work elsewhere to accommodate the spouse. If the Justice writes a book and if the income from the book brings into question the impartiality of the Justice, then he or she should publicly announce that all proceeds go to a noncontroversial charity. Justices must not give speeches for money, and must not give speeches to interest groups with business before the court. It just looks bad.
Is it unfair to demand the Supreme Court Justices sacrifice in this way? I think not. Every other federal employee and every other state and federal judge has rules of this kind. Police, fire-fighters, and soldiers are expected to do dangerous, potentially self-sacrificing things. It is part of the job. Probity and impartiality is part of the Supreme Court job.
The correct standard for the Supreme Court should not be "is it clearly illegal." It should be "does it in any way reduce the credibility of the Supreme Court." Chief Justice Roberts should tell the Justices this is the new policy, starting now, and that if they won't accept it, that he will urge they be impeached and removed. They will either stay or go.
It is not too much to ask.
Excellent post Peter, love the title.
How can it be that it is asking too much of these life appointed, SCJs, whom I'd always imagined as having impartiality, wisdom in years on the bench, impeccable manners & decorum at the bare minimum. What we now have are 2 men who sexually abused women, ( of which the FBI refused to interview the lists of victims & witness' to what each woman accused each man of ). 4 who lied in their job interviews about Roe v Wade being settled law, 1 who never sat on a bench as a judge, 1 who's an insipid bigot. The absolute power over our country that this court holds until each SCJ either resigns or dies, is just obscene at this juncture.
I was a teacher for many years in another state. In addition to a low salary, we were required to refuse any gifts valued over $2.50. This was closely watched and strictly enforced. I am appalled by the unethical behaviors exhibited by our Supreme Court Justices. They should at least be held to as high a standard as a teacher is.