Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 90 posts

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#31

Post by gnicholas »

mettamage wrote: post #18
apozem wrote: post #10

This is a fine gesture, but it does not solve the fundamental problem that Supreme Court justices are an unelected super-government with lifetime appointments and zero accountability . The whole institution is absurd and undemocratic and, as Clarence Thomas has proved [0], ripe with opportunities for corruption. A non-binding code of ethics doesn't change that. [0]: https://www.propublica.org/series/supreme-court-sco…

How did the Supreme Court come into being? How has it been able to fly under the radar like this as being undemocratic?

Article III, section I of the Constitution.

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#33

Post by noarchy »

boxed wrote: post #14
apozem wrote: post #10

This is a fine gesture, but it does not solve the fundamental problem that Supreme Court justices are an unelected super-government with lifetime appointments and zero accountability . The whole institution is absurd and undemocratic and, as Clarence Thomas has proved [0], ripe with opportunities for corruption. A non-binding code of ethics doesn't change that. [0]: https://www.propublica.org/series/supreme-court-sco…

> and zero accountability They can be impeached?

>They can be impeached?

To answer your question: yes.

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#34

Post by mikeyouse »

willcipriano wrote: post #16
apozem wrote: post #10

This is a fine gesture, but it does not solve the fundamental problem that Supreme Court justices are an unelected super-government with lifetime appointments and zero accountability . The whole institution is absurd and undemocratic and, as Clarence Thomas has proved [0], ripe with opportunities for corruption. A non-binding code of ethics doesn't change that. [0]: https://www.propublica.org/series/supreme-court-sco…

Same is true of most of government. From the FDA to the ATF practical life altering choices are increasingly made by a unelected permanent government unfettered by things like accountability.

Those departments are executive branch departments, their leadership can be fired by the President and can be appointed with a simple majority in the Senate - hence how we've had 7 FDA commissioners since 2017 - not remotely comparable to the US Supreme Court.

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#35

Post by archildress »

ImJamal wrote: post #27
archildress wrote: post #11

Headline ought to be re-written as "Supreme Court forced to codify once-unwritten rules due to rampant abuse by Justice Thomas."

You may want to read the article since others have issues as well. >Many of those stories focused on Justice Clarence Thomas and his failure to disclose travel and other financial ties with wealthy conservative donors including Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. But Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor also have been under scrutiny.

Roughly equivalent to "all news networks are biased", overlooking the "but not to equivalent degrees."

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#36

Post by jcranmer »

Amorymeltzer wrote: post #3

The document itself: https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/Code-of-Conduct-for-Justi... >For the most part these rules and principles are not new: The Court has long had the equivalent of common law ethics rules, that is, a body of rules derived from a variety of sources, including statutory provisions, the code that applies to other members of the federal judiciary, ethics advisory opinions issued by the Judicial Confe…

One of the noticeable lacks I see is that there's a mention that a justice shouldn't be a member of a civic or charitable organization if it's going to be engaged in litigation before the court, but there's no corresponding mention for legal organizations that may be engaged in litigation. Given that one of the issues is the role of the Federalist Society in the many seeming conflicts of interests it produces, this does seem like an intentional oversight.

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#37

Post by drawkward »

ImJamal wrote: post #27
archildress wrote: post #11

Headline ought to be re-written as "Supreme Court forced to codify once-unwritten rules due to rampant abuse by Justice Thomas."

You may want to read the article since others have issues as well. >Many of those stories focused on Justice Clarence Thomas and his failure to disclose travel and other financial ties with wealthy conservative donors including Harlan Crow and the Koch brothers. But Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor also have been under scrutiny.

That may be true, but the extent of the reporting suggests that The Honorable Justice Thomas might be a bit more ethically lapsed.

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#38

Post by mikeyouse »

salamandersss wrote: post #20
apozem wrote: post #10

This is a fine gesture, but it does not solve the fundamental problem that Supreme Court justices are an unelected super-government with lifetime appointments and zero accountability . The whole institution is absurd and undemocratic and, as Clarence Thomas has proved [0], ripe with opportunities for corruption. A non-binding code of ethics doesn't change that. [0]: https://www.propublica.org/series/supreme-court-sco…

Yep. Ruth Ginsburg was another corrupt one, taking lavish trips funded by Israeli billionaires. But whoops, I wasn't supposed to mention the ones people here may like.

Do you think maybe there should be a distinction between trips reported on annual disclosure statements and those taken privately and without being reported?

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#39

Post by moate »

Amorymeltzer wrote: post #3

The document itself: https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/Code-of-Conduct-for-Justi... >For the most part these rules and principles are not new: The Court has long had the equivalent of common law ethics rules, that is, a body of rules derived from a variety of sources, including statutory provisions, the code that applies to other members of the federal judiciary, ethics advisory opinions issued by the Judicial Confe…

I missed the part discussing enforcement and consequences, because surely this wouldn’t just be a mealy mouthed list of suggestions without recourse. What would the point of that be other than a fig leaf over Clarence Thomas?

Oh wait…

Re: The US Supreme Court says it is adopting a code of ethics for the first time

#40

Post by mikepurvis »

beezlebroxxxxxx wrote: post #23

This is an interesting attempt to ward off the growing skepticism of judicial supremacy in some groups. There is a fascinating struggle between judicial supremacy and constitutional supremacy in America with a long history. Obviously there are pros and cons to each view, and who is for or against one or the other often changes depending on the social issue at hand. I don't think a code of ethics will be very effectiv…

As a foreigner who isn't in the know, what does constitutional supremacy look like in practical terms? Isn't it still the judges who have the last word on how the constitution is to be interpreted and applied?
Post reply on HN