Post
According to this toothless document, the justices aren’t supposed to hear matters where they have direct financial stakes in the parties. Thus, this new #software package & a tweak to the filing rules to require parties include their stock ticker symbols.
To be clear, lower #court #judges have been using conflict-checking software since 2007. #SCOTUS first hinted that it might start using conflict-checking software in 2023. After that, the Court went silent….
No federal official in any branch of government should be able to hold stocks in any company.
It's a clear conflict of interest regardless of which stock, regardless of which area of government.
Choose.
Work for the people or go gamble in Walk Street.
@Nonilex while continuing to shred precedent on both the shadow docket and end-of-term rulings.
@Nonilex it's not that in disappointed, it's more like I'm exhausted from feeling zero surprise. Does that make sense?
#SCOTUS announced Tuesday that it will now employ #software to help the justices identify when they should probably #recuse themselves from cases. We say “probably,” because there’s still no actually enforceable #ethics code binding #SupremeCourt justices & the #ChiefJustice has made very clear that he will ignore any attempt to impose one. Instead, the Supreme Court drafted a 14-page pinky swear that they will follow some of the same rules that bind lower court judges.
@Nonilex
I wouldnt mind if the entire court was flushed down the open sewer line to the Potomac....They have no business being on any bench...not even a softball game bench.
According to this toothless document, the justices aren’t supposed to hear matters where they have direct financial stakes in the parties. Thus, this new #software package & a tweak to the filing rules to require parties include their stock ticker symbols.
To be clear, lower #court #judges have been using conflict-checking software since 2007. #SCOTUS first hinted that it might start using conflict-checking software in 2023. After that, the Court went silent….
827 days later: mission accomplished!
Gabe Roth of Fix the Court put a fine point on the situation∶
“Per their most recent disclosures, only two justices, Chief Justice #Roberts & Justice #Alito, own individual stocks, with the former holding shares in two companies & the latter holding shares in more than two dozen.
“So although the new rule is a net positive since it comes in service of the full Court’s adoption of conflict-check software, it’s not a major improvement, & it should not have taken 827 days post-Code to implement. That’s especially true since lower court #judges have been required to use software-based conflict screening for 20 years, & several justices have been rumored to continue to use it after they were elevated.”
Justice Alito’s stock portfolio has become a recurring subplot in the Court’s ongoing ethics drama. Just last month, #Alito recused himself—right before oral arguments—from the high-profile #Chevron USA v. Plaquemines Parish case because of his holdings in #ConocoPhillips, whose subsidiary Burlington Resources remained a party in the lower court proceedings. Alito holds stock in more than two dozen companies & accounts for roughly a third of all recusals at the Court.
@Nonilex Venezuela was a pure corporate war
Meanwhile, the other 7 justices have figured out how to manage their finances without being ethical drags upon the Court [in terms of stock investments only. #ClarenceThomas is absolutely an ethical drag]. The #SupremeCourt took over 2 years to institute a new #software solution to fix a problem that exists solely because these 2 refuse to divest from the market as a small price to pay for being the nation’s SuperLegislature.
@Nonilex fucking assholes
