Human Rights Alert

PO Box 526, La Verne, CA 91750

Fax: 323.488.9697; Email: jz12345@earthlink.net
Blog: http://human-rights-alert.blogspot.com/
Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/Human_Rights_Alert

11-02-23 CHANGING ETHICAL AND RECUSAL RULES FOR SUPREME COURT

JUSTICES, Letter by 107 Law Professor
Attached:
1) Latest Judgepedia contribution on the matter
2) February 23, 2011 Letter by 107 law professors

_________

Supreme Court of the United States

…
Criticism

…
Ethics concerns and proposed "mandatory and enforceable ethics rules"
Alleged ethics violations by various justices have been reported in recent years, and with them, the need has been noted for rules pertaining to ethics and recusals of Supreme
Court justices. No such rules exist at present.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] [19][20][21]

In early 2011, more than 100 law professors released a letter, which proposed congressional hearings and legislation to establish "mandatory and enforceable" ethics rules for
Supreme Court justices. [22] [23]

According the Legal Times report:[24]

The professors note that the Court is not covered by the code of conduct that lower federal court judges are required to follow. The Supreme Court has long said it
looks to the code for "guidance" -- a concession which, the signers agree, "has proved insufficient." The letter also points out disapprovingly that individual justices
alone decide whether they should or should not recuse in a given case, not subject to review by anyone else, and with no requirement to explain their decisions.

The letter states: [25]

Adherence to mandatory ethical rules by justices, and requiring transparent, reviewable recusal decisions that do not turn solely on the silent opinion of the
challenged justice will reinforce the integrity and legitimacy of the Supreme Court. [26]

References
10. ↑ Skaggs, A and Silver A: Promoting Fair and Impartial Courts through Recusal Reform, The Brennan Center February 10, 2011
11. ↑ Editorial: Untenable Judicial Ethics, New York Times November 27, 2010
12. ↑ Liptak A: Odd Court Routine: Being the Judge of Whether to Be the Judge, New York Times November 15, 2010
13. ↑ Liptak A: When a Justice and a Case Are Too Close, New York Times July 24, 2010
14. ↑ Stein,S: Justices Scalia And Thomas's Attendance At Koch Event Sparks Judicial Ethics Debate , Huffington Post October 20, 2010
15. ↑ Hamburger,T: Justices' impartiality in campaign spending case questioned, Los Angeles Times January 21, 2011
16. ↑ Scalia, Thomas Accused of Conflict of Interest, Advocate January 21, 2011
17. ↑ Shapiro B: Clarence Thomas's Ethics Problems, Then and Now, The Nation October 20, 2010
18. ↑ Lithwick D: Justices need to set clearer rules about partisan political activity, Slate November 18, 2010
19. ↑ Kaplan R: Watchdog Says Clarence Thomas Failed to Report Wife's Heritage Foundation Income, National Journal January 24, 2011
20. ↑ Lewinson J: Clarence Thomas offers "implausible" excuse for false disclosure reports spanning 13 years, The Daily Kos January 25, 2011
21. ↑ Media Coverage of Supreme Court Ethics, Alliance for Justice
22. ↑ Smith RJ: Professors ask Congress for an ethics code for Supreme Court, Washington Post February 23, 2011
23. ↑ Richey D: Law professors ask Congress to subject Supreme Court justices to ethics rules, Jurist February 24, 2011
24. ↑ "Law Profs Urge Ethics Rules for Supreme Court Justices", Blog of the Legal Times February 24, 2011
25. ↑ CHANGING ETHICAL AND RECUSAL RULES FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICES, 107 Law Professor, February 22, 2011
26. ↑ "Law Profs Urge Ethics Rules for Supreme Court Justices", Blog of the Legal Times February 24, 2011