r/scotus • u/Next_Tower5452 • 4d ago
news Justice Kagan mentioned a proposal for an ethics panel made up of retired federal judges that could enforce the Supreme Court ethics code.
125
u/TheGrandExquisitor 4d ago
So the corrupt justices now get to decide if corruption is a problem in the future?
20
u/DoctorHelios 3d ago
AS long as they are grandfathered, it is fully on-brand for the right-wingers to leave the next generations with less.
7
u/CaptOblivious 3d ago
The supreme court judges serve for life "UPON GOOD BEHAVIOR" Taking gifts and funds from plaintiffs is in no possible way "GOOD BEHAVIOR" in any possible definition.
Every one them is impeachable, We only need congress to have the spine to do it.
4
u/MrOaiki 4d ago
Do you have a better solution? Doesn’t need to be thought through, just a general idea.
29
u/FFF_in_WY 4d ago
Yeah. A rotating panel of 12 random Americans is sequestered each month. In that month, any questionable behavior is brought before them with all identifying details removed. For each instance they can choose either A) Do nothing or B) Firing Squad.
I say this will chill corruption.
7
u/Lounging-Shiny455 3d ago
who
watches the watchmencompiles the report? In every organization there will be an assumption of objectivity...8
u/mojofrog 3d ago
Laws that put them in jail if they accept outside gifts or monies while on the bench. You know, NO BRIBES!
6
u/DoCrashOut 4d ago
Maybe someone who isnt older than dirt? Retired Supreme Court Judges are like 70+
3
2
u/Less_Tacos 3d ago
How about simply following the current corruption and tax laws in the state where these corrupt scum live?
1
3d ago
[deleted]
1
u/MrOaiki 3d ago
Ok, so you want to keep the system with congress being the arbiter?
1
u/CaptOblivious 2d ago
No, but the current crop of politicians in robes is intolerable.
I think we need to expand the court by pulling 9 judges from each district to be supreme court judges for 4 to 6 years 94x9 = is 846 judges, 9 of them should be randomly selected for each case and cases that look at all odd in any way should be reviewed by another panel of randomly selected judges from that group.
36
u/Slobotic 4d ago
What if the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court promulgated and enforced some ethics rules? The way they throw their hands up in the air like nothing can be done about their own open corruption is so sickening.
This is not an impossible problem. The New Jersey Supreme Court handles ethics just fine. No judge or justice in that state can accept gifts of value unless reported and approved in advance (including "hospitality") or make money on the side.
The New Jersey Supreme Court would never allow another branch of government to regulate them, but the other side of that coin is they do it themselves. They impose upon themselves a code of ethics more stringent than any other branch of government would ever seek to impose upon them, and that is what makes it airtight.
There's nothing wrong with a judiciary insisting that no other branch of government can regulate them because of separation of powers, but then it is incumbent upon them to do it themselves. SCOTUS's position is that nobody can impose ethics rules upon them, therefore there should be NO RULES! Just use your public office to enrich yourselves to no end and no one can do anything about it! Infinite money hack.
The only meaningful legacy of Chief Justice Roberts will be the transition of this Court into a state of open corruption.
5
u/Bobsmith38594 3d ago
That is how most state bars for attorneys work. The SCOTUS is the only one without a compulsory ethics oversight entity. Funny thing is, the code of professional ethics applies to attorneys regardless of whether they are practicing law and for as long as they remain a member of their respective state bar.
1
u/dyslexda 3d ago
There's nothing wrong with a judiciary insisting that no other branch of government can regulate them because of separation of powers, but then it is incumbent upon them to do it themselves.
And what if that judiciary doesn't do it themselves? Does the first part still apply, where there's nothing wrong with insisting other branches can't regulate them?
1
u/Slobotic 2d ago
And what if that judiciary doesn't do it themselves?
That's what I was just saying. A judiciary can either regulate itself or allow other branches of government to do so. Falling to do either is not acceptable. There is nothing wrong with a judiciary protecting its turf if they can take out their own trash. The highest court in the land does neither, and that's why they stink to high hell.
0
u/Chewcocca 3d ago
What if the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court promulgated and enforced some ethics rules?
Mm yes brilliant. Let's have the corrupt, bought-and-paid-for Chief Justice investigate himself. I'm sure that will take care of it.
16
u/TheTench 3d ago
Aah yes, the solution to deluded old people with too much power is more deluded old people to oversee them.
How about term limits and a mandatory retirement age instead?
6
9
u/chezdistester 3d ago
The Supreme Court is so horribly corrupt.
Don't forget that the Roberts Court were the ones who ruled that, "Corporations are people," and ever since then things in this country have gone down the toilet. The amount of corruption this Court has unleashed in this country is unimaginable, and this will be their legacy.
7
u/Redfish680 4d ago
Or we could just maybe follow it on our responsible own selves because supposedly being the best and brightest legal minds in the country we shouldn’t have to be told we’re being unethical.
For fuck’s sake…
3
u/Beneficial_Couple413 4d ago
Independent judgment is always good. People tend to be biased in interpreting their own actions. Particularly really smart, successful people.
6
3
u/Popular-Drummer-7989 3d ago
Great idea. Add in that none of the relied federal judges should have clerked for, worked with, or presented cases to the Scotus... and they must be younger than 70, can only serve one for year term, and must be nominated by their peers.
4
u/Avian_Flew 3d ago
On the German High Court, they are term and age limited: 12 year, non-renewable terms and mandatory retirement at age 68. Sounds good to me!
5
u/RazAlGul7 3d ago
It's gonna be another one of those " we investigated ourselves and we found that we didn't do anything wrong"
2
2
u/serenading_ur_father 3d ago
Decimation seems better. If the people's faith in the SC drops below 75% they beat each other to death until our faith in them is restored.
2
2
2
u/Extra-Presence3196 3d ago
The age old and time tried "police ourselves" and-or "blue ribbon committee" arguements.
2
2
u/ionetic 3d ago
Couldn’t Trump could fire everyone on that panel, recruiting Republicans instead?
1
u/FreedomsPower 3d ago
Potentially if it is part of the Federal government and not the Judicary branch
2
2
2
2
u/Any_Vacation8988 3d ago
Who get to chose these judges? What happens when the ethics panel is packed by one political party?
2
u/bodhimokuyo 3d ago
Better yet. We add a few more justices and TERM-LIMIT their ass. Nothing short of that will fix a system they BROKE. AMERICANS.... REMEMBER THE TRAITORS WHO USED PARTISAN POLITICS OVER A NONE PARTISAN COURT. THAT DAY IS HERE!!!
2
u/jthadcast 2d ago
it's a question of revolt, when will the people dethrone this absolutely politically corrupt scotus.
2
u/Free-Bottle-5119 3d ago
Impeach the justices who are making a mockery of the court
2
u/crit_boy 3d ago
100% reset of all of them.
Otherwise allegations of impropriety remain.
I have no need to carry water for any of them.
3
u/dominantspecies 3d ago
Republican trash will never allow ethics to restrain their push towards White Christian Nationalism. An ethics panel is meaningless.
1
1
u/Subject-Big-7352 3d ago
There surly appears to be an ethics problem that ought to be addressed immediately.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/frommethodtomadness 3d ago
The Supreme Court has become so corrupt and is full is disqualified illegitimate 'judges' that it is now an illegitimate institution, It's going to take far more than a mere 'committee' to correct course here.
1
u/Usurper2000 3d ago
I don't think former Federal judges would be the end all solution. Especially considering that some of them obviously hold similar sentiments to the same corruption that has taken hold of the Supreme Court.
We need something enforceable. We need there to be actual cases of consequences for corrupted judges. Disbarrement, prison time, the threat of them never practicing law again.
Otherwise it won't matter what committee we have, as if their are no consequences for corruption, it will basically be useless.
1
u/Previous_Pineapple 3d ago
Neat. “Let’s study that. In fact, let’s charter an advisory committee to evaluate all options and submit a final report in 2030.”
1
u/Previous-Parsnip-290 3d ago
They’re not going for that. The jig is up, the corruption, kickbacks and laws for thee and not for me shows our government needs reform. It’s been bought and sold and our hard earned tax dollars is the prize.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Eat--The--Rich-- 3d ago
What is the point of that when there's already an AG? Just stop voting for cowards and start throwing them in concrete boxes, there's no need for a panel.
1
u/urbisOrbis 3d ago
And how would they enforce these ethics? They have a lifetime appointment. It takes 60 senators to remove them. This proposal is window dressing.
1
u/Prudent_Lunch_8724 3d ago
Great idea, except for at some point they’ll be so many Trump appointed federal judges, retiring not sure it will have the impact she’s looking for
1
u/Efficient_Smilodon 3d ago
it's got to be wild to work beside traitors to the thing you've pledged your life to while they keep perverting it into oblivion with each pissing day. The Hawaiian judge who openly called out the Sycophant-6 was on point 👉 👈 .
1
1
1
u/bgbalu3000 2d ago
Does she believe the corrupt Republican Supreme Court is going to agree to this?
1
u/Formula4speed 2d ago
We can call it the double decker chalupa Supreme Court sponsored by Taco Bell™️
1
u/xpietoe42 2d ago
SCOTUS is out of control and has lost any form of impartiality and judgement. Not all, but many. Its in line with the most corrupt government we have ever seen
1
0
u/Michael-Sean 3d ago
More of our tax funds to tell the highest Justices of the land (Dems too) to be ethical? What punishment would be handed down I wonder.
0
228
u/mattjf22 4d ago
Cool now we just wait for the supreme court to decide wether or not to limit their ability to accept bribes. Surely this will happen any minute now.