Law Professors Ask for Ethics Code for Supreme Court Justices

This blog has looked at the unethical and biased conduct of Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia a number of times. Given the conduct of Thomas in lying on financial disclosure statements and the activities of his wife, a case can surely be made that Thomas needs to be removed from the Court. Thomas clearly thinks himself above the law and has flipped the bird at traditional political disengagement by judges. Scalia's behavior, while less egregious, is no less troubling. These two men have made it perfectly clear that they are incapable of objectivity and unbiased consideration of a number of significant cases coming before the Court. Now, a number of law professors are calling on Congress to enact ethical rules that would clarify when Justices must step aside in cases. The Washington Post looks at this development. Here are some story highlights:
*
A group of more than a hundred law professors from across the country has asked Congress to extend an ethical code of conduct to the Supreme Court - for the first time - and clarify when individual justices should step away from specific legal cases.
*
The group's appeal on Wednesday, in a letter to the House and Senate Judiciary committees, comes after recent controversies involving travel and appearances at political events by several Supreme Court justices, including Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia. Rep. Christopher S. Murphy (D-Conn.) said he plans to introduce legislation that addresses the issue.
*
Thomas and Scalia have been criticized by a public interest group for attending private political meetings sponsored in January 2007 and 2008 by David and Charles Koch, conservative billionaires who made large contributions during last year's election and have financially backed the tea party movement.
*
Precisely what happened at those meetings remains unclear, but neither of the justices' routine financial disclosures mentioned that the Kochs had organized the events.
*
Decisions to recuse, or step away from deliberations, by tradition have been left up to the individual justices at the center of any complaint, contrary to the practice on most state supreme courts. The professors said in their letter to the committees that their goal is not to second-guess the activities of any individual judge but to create "mandatory and enforceable rules to protect the integrity of the Supreme Court.
*
As seems to be increasingly the case it is the so-called conservatives who claim to honor the Constitution that are the biggest threat to its continued application across the board. Just like the Christianists who lie incessantly while claiming to revere the Bible, Thomas, Scalia and their conservative brethren make a mockery of much of the Constitution.