Senate Democrats Announce Vote To Advance Supreme Court Ethics Bill

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna93486

It should be interesting to see the politics play out, of Senate Republicans trying to block ethics rules, through filibuster. That will pretty much say it all, about that Party.

<Snip>
WASHINGTON — Top Senate Democrats announced Monday that a key committee will vote on legislation to set up a code of conduct for the Supreme Court, tighten financial disclosure rules and beef up recusal requirements for justices.

The Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act, led by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., will get a vote in the committee on July 20, they announced in a joint statement.
<End Snip>


Below are a couple of related stories, about Clarence Thomas's new ethics mess, but also about a problematic story for Justice Sotomayor.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...e-thomas-ethics-mess-goes-bad-worse-rcna93379


https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...-sotomayor-faces-unwelcome-headline-rcna93636

 

Shocking, the left is angry that they lost the SC for the rest of their lives so create fake issues over it lol. Purely symbolic.

 

Show us where the Constitution empowers Congress to impose rules on the High Court.

 

It's a distraction issue to be sure, but it's hardly unfounded. Clarence Thomas has clearly leveraged his position for improper personal gain, Alito possibly as well. I realize since they align with your morality that the Trump supporter in you can't help but give them a free pass to do whatever they want, but for some of us that's just not possible.

 

Article 3 section 1

 

Fake News.

Article 3 describes JUDICIAL powers not CONGRESSIONAL powers.

 

who determines the good behavior?

 

Read section 1

 

And notice it says good, not legal….seems to indicate they can be policed for more than just crimes

 

I did. It's in section 3, which does not describe the powers of Congress.

 

Congress does, via their Article 1 impeachment power.

 

The high court should police itself, anything less can be weaponized or used to harass them.


And Schumer gives us example #345,986 of why he’s a POS.

 

If Congress can determine what the good behavior is, then it seems logical Congress can create new ethics rules

 

What other branches of government do you think can be trusted to police themselves?

 

Democrats butting in where they don't belong. Maybe they should check themselves first.

 

Suddenly republicans are against oversight of public employees

 

I'd rather see Congress come up with some basic ethics rules than simply decide to add 7 more justices to the Court. That they absolutely
have the power to do.

 

The Constitution gives them the power to do anything that is not assigned to the states' purview (or barred to the Congress), in the Constitution.

 

Do you also advocate the ideal candidate for chicken coop monitoring, to be foxes?


How can a set of ethics rules, be seen as a "weaponization" risk? The entire Judiciary, other than the SCOTUS, has these. The Congress, has these. There are ethics rules for the President, as well. So it is only the Supreme Court, where this weaponization potential, is real? On top of that, once the rules have been passed into law, they could only be changed by another act of law-- so you would be talking about bi-partisan "weaponization."

 

I guess if this passes, the Supreme Court can declare it unconstitutional and that would be the end of that. If they are really serious, the impeachment process is there and they should use it. Unfortunately, that won’t happen.

 

YOu don't think every office requires ethics rules?

 

CAn't happen as long as the RWNJs are working together to destroy the country.

 

You forgot about the other side of things. See, there are justices appointed by both sides of the aisle on the bench. The GOP people could go ahead and impeach Kagan, or Brown, etc. The DNC in the senate would say no. Reverse the parties in control. Also remember the amount of votes required for it to go through. Gotta have the numbers. So you can blame one side, but it WILL be both.

Both sides are working to “destroy the country”. But I disagree that either is actually “destroying the country”. They suck. Badly. The country won’t be destroyed though. We’ve been through a civil war and are still a country. We’ve been through some awful crap and we are still here.

 

Absolutely untrue.

 

I would like to see them do both-- since, for practical purposes, impeachment of the Justices who'd lied to Senators about their views-- and that charge has even been laid by Republican Senator Susan Collins-- is off the table, as President Biden has come down solidly against Court expansion. But this illegitimate majority, then, will have mind boggling decades ahead of them, to remake U.S. law. The idea of a larger court, with some member(s) rotating, each case, seems a safer system, to protect against any activist Justices-- on the Left, as well as on the Right.