A case was just decided in the Supreme Court 5-4 to the effect that a judge must recuse himself from hearing a case a party to which has given that judge a large campaign contribution. That seems like a no-brainer, but to this late date, it had not yet been carved in the stone of our laws.
The case in this case came out of West Virginia where, as I understand it, Massey Energy, with a $3 million campaign contribution, essentially bought a judge to put on the bench before a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the company went to appeal. Apparently four of the Supreme Court justices took issue with barring a judge to be bought for favors.
WIIIAI explains Chief Justice Roberts' reasoning.
Roberts argued that “sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.” The “disease” which he complacently suggests we just live with is judicial corruption. The lawsuits that will arise from this ruling, according to Roberts, “will do far more to erode public confidence in judicial impartiality than an isolated failure to recuse in a particular case.” This is the culture of secrecy; it is the language used by the Bush and, now, the Obama administrations to justify suppressing pictures of prisoner abuse. Roberts, like Obama, is unwilling to expose corruption because it would make the system look bad, and he thinks the exposure is the problem, not the corruption.
....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. There may be some delay before your comment is published. It all depends on how much time M has in the day. But please comment!