3 ms·

Is there any binding law that prevents any organization from bribing the Supreme Court into making favorable rulings? Shouldn’t the default assumption be that r

by dangus 2y ago

Is there any binding law that prevents any organization from bribing the Supreme Court into making favorable rulings? Shouldn’t the default assumption be that recommended judges are friendly to their influence? The plain fact that the Supreme Court has record low level trust as an institution makes any important ruling that reaches their court something of an exercise in anxiety. I think that’s worthy of discussion and I don’t think the original comment was inflammatory. Just my own opinion.

coldpie 2y ago
> Is there any binding law that prevents any organization from bribing the Supreme Court into making favorable rulings? There is not. SCOTUS justices can, and do, openly and privately accept bribes. The Supreme Court could make its own rules against bribery and enforce them, but it explicitly chose not to[1]. There is currently an effort to pass a law to require SCOTUS to have an ethics policy[2]. However, the party proposing it does not have enough power to enact it. It's up to voters now. [1] Notice all of the rules in their recently released Code of Conduct use "should," not "must." There is also no enforcement mechanism. This "Code of Conduct" is functionally functionally equivalent to having no Code. https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/Code-of-Conduct-for-Justices_November_13_2023.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/Code-of-Conduct-for-Justi... [2] "Binding Code of Conduct for the Supreme Court: Congress should pass binding, enforceable conduct and ethics rules that require Justices to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity, and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Supreme Court Justices should not be exempt from the enforceable code of conduct that applies to every other federal judge." https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/07/29/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-bold-plan-to-reform-the-supreme-court-and-ensure-no-president-is-above-the-law/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...
ethbr1 2y ago
> holding an important discussion. It's better to start an important discussion with a substantive comment than a quippy name-drop. There's definitely an interesting discussion to be had about the lack of Supreme Court ethics guidelines and enforcement, bad faith judges, lobbyist influences on judges, etc. But building that discussion on a flamebait parent post isn't the strongest foundation.

by dangus 2y ago

coldpie 2y ago

> Is there any binding law that prevents any organization from bribing the Supreme Court into making favorable rulings? There is not. SCOTUS justices can, and do, openly and privately accept bribes. The Supreme Court could make its own rules against bribery and enforce them, but it explicitly chose not to[1]. There is currently an effort to pass a law to require SCOTUS to have an ethics policy[2]. However, the party proposing it does not have enough power to enact it. It's up to voters now. [1] Notice all of the rules in their recently released Code of Conduct use "should," not "must." There is also no enforcement mechanism. This "Code of Conduct" is functionally functionally equivalent to having no Code. https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/Code-of-Conduct-for-Justices_November_13_2023.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/Code-of-Conduct-for-Justi... [2] "Binding Code of Conduct for the Supreme Court: Congress should pass binding, enforceable conduct and ethics rules that require Justices to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity, and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Supreme Court Justices should not be exempt from the enforceable code of conduct that applies to every other federal judge." https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/07/29/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-bold-plan-to-reform-the-supreme-court-and-ensure-no-president-is-above-the-law/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...

ethbr1 2y ago

> holding an important discussion. It's better to start an important discussion with a substantive comment than a quippy name-drop. There's definitely an interesting discussion to be had about the lack of Supreme Court ethics guidelines and enforcement, bad faith judges, lobbyist influences on judges, etc. But building that discussion on a flamebait parent post isn't the strongest foundation.