758
submitted 6 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Legal experts say its time for the Supreme Court's ethics code to grow some teeth

Legal experts are lamenting the lack of an enforceable judicial ethics code, with some calling for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's recusal, following a New York Times report that a symbol of the “Stop the Steal” movement to reject the 2020 election was flown outside Alito’s home in the wake of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Ten leading legal experts told Salon Friday that the conduct — the flying of an upside-down flag, a known symbol of the movement to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, at a justice's home — appears to violate the Supreme Court's own ethics code, adopted last last year, by creating an appearance of bias.

Those experts said it’s far past time for the nine justices who enjoy lifetime appointments to hold themselves to the highest ethical standards. But, they noted, the Supreme Court has shown itself reluctant to do so.

"The situation is out of control," Richard Painter, a former White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush who worked with Justice Alito on his 2006 Senate confirmation, told Salon. "This is after the insurrection, so it's really him weighing in, getting involved publicly in a dispute over the insurrection."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago

Nope. I just don't automatically consider the system infallible and correct.

Legitimate presidents get elected, not appointed via an antidemocratic mechanism that hasn't been excised because too many rich and powerful people benefit from it.

[-] timespace@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago
[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago

Not legitimately, no. Your comprehension seems lacking.

[-] timespace@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

I’m comprehension is fine. Your understanding of how presidents are elected in this country seems lacking.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

I’m comprehension is fine.

The irony 😄

Your understanding of how presidents are elected in this country seems lacking.

I understand just fine. Knowing how the system works and agreeing with it are two separate things.

Just because the president isn't selected by popular vote doesn't mean that the legitimacy of a president selected after losing the popular vote isn't suspect as best.

If a beer drinking contest was the decider rather than the electoral college, would you still say that President Dale would be the legitimate president for drinking Biden and Trump under the table after receiving 4 write-in votes?

[-] timespace@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago

Lulz. 😂

Anyway, I’m not an advocate for the EC, I think the winner should be the winner of the popular vote. But that’s not the system we have. You can’t say The Chiefs aren’t legitimate SB champs because you don’t agree with some rule in place. That’s just not how it works. I mean, you can, but no one is going to take you seriously.

If you have an issue with the EC, talk about that. But to say every president elected by the EC and not popular vote is illegitimate is just nonsense.

this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
758 points (98.6% liked)

News

23296 readers
1296 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS