Senate Panel Approves Supreme Court Ethics Bill With Dim Prospects
www.nytimes.com
Republicans accused Democrats of trying to undermine the court with the measure and vowed to block it from advancing in the Senate, making it highly unlikely to become law.

Although I agree with this bill, the NYT calling it “strict new ethics rules” is a bit much. Reading the requirements in the bill itself, it struck me as legislating that SCOTUS justices do the bare ethical minimum required of most every other judge - in other words, it’s the type of bill that shows up when an organization demonstrates that it is incapable of self-policing.

What’s shocking is 100% opposition by Republicans to a bill requiring a Justice to recuse if a close family member receives a large gift from a litigant - literally, that’s in the bill.

How is this controversial? Senator Graham says why - requiring the court to act ethically will “destroy” the court. He’s saying, we don’t care if justices are ethical so long as they’re partisan.

Congress needs to step up here.

  • @shalafi
    25•11 months ago

    Comparisons need not be fair. They just need to get it out there and it works. I don’t know how many times I’ve been discussing politics IRL when someone says, “Yeah, but the liberals do it to! Look at this!”

    My favorite:

    “Are you seriously conflating protests over racial discrimination with a takeover of our nation’s Capital in an attempt to overthrow the government?!”

    “They’re the same.”

    • @teuast
      7•11 months ago

      “Our side may have tried to violently overturn a fair election and install a fascist dictator in an insurrection that killed five people, but your side holds protests against racially-motivated police violence and some of those protests led to property damage, and that’s where I draw the line!”

      • @SoleInvictus
        4•11 months ago

        Damn, you got that one right in the bullseye.