The contradiction between Justice Alito's prior commitment to ethics laws and his current stance reveals a fundamental tension in our understanding of power and accountability. This incident serves as a reflection of a broader system where principles often succumb to the mechanisms of authority, exposing the frailty of ethical commitments in the face of institutionalized power.
this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
125 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10177 readers
20 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Did an AI write this comment?
Not sure how to respond to this, but no it did not 😅
Well, Reddit bots always said “beep boop”, so I think that's how you're supposed to respond.
That was the old place... what should a Lemmy bot say instead? 🤔
bleep bloop the added l is for lemmy. /s
Did an AI write THIS comment??
Definitely not!
I'm not sure. It's partly just that Alito is a selfish, lonely, bitter, viciously bigoted person. The progressive justices don't seem to be having a problem following the ethics rules.
I'm progressive as they come, but that's not entirely true. While nowhere near as bad as any of the conservative justices, Sotomayor used her position of power to have her staff push book sales to libraries and schools, something that would be illegal for pretty much any other federal employee:
Sotomayor’s staff has often prodded public institutions that have hosted the justice to buy her memoir or children’s books, works that have earned her at least $3.7 million since she joined the court in 2009. Details of those events, largely out of public view, were obtained by The Associated Press through more than 100 open records requests to public institutions. The resulting tens of thousands of pages of documents offer a rare look at Sotomayor and her fellow justices beyond their official duties.
In her case, the documents reveal repeated examples of taxpayer-funded court staff performing tasks for the justice’s book ventures, which workers in other branches of government are barred from doing. But when it comes to promoting her literary career, Sotomayor is free to do what other government officials cannot because the Supreme Court does not have a formal code of conduct, leaving the nine justices to largely write and enforce their own rules.
Good comment! (Sorry, not on here a lot)
An important reminder and a good counter example. That said...this is petty and clearly unethical, and also strikes me as quite a different phenomenon from the kind of open corruption we are talking about with the conservative justices.
Reading your comment was like a breath of fresh air. Eloquently put.
Appreciated, thank you for the compliment ☺️
load more comments
(1 replies)
These corrupt, lying fuckers also said they wouldn't overturn Roe. This court needs to be dissolved and anyone who so much as bummed a cig from someone with business before the court needs to be imprisoned. You want your word to be law and the only oversight to be literal death? You need to be absolutely flawless at all times. None of this "well technically it's not illegal" garbage.
The rule of law isn't a supernatural force, it's a bargain with the angry masses. If you don't honor the bargain, why would they?
Well when there are no consequences for lying and being corrupt, who cares if he promised extra hard. The honour system doesnt work when youre talking about extreme power, wealth and influence.
Exactly, they would need to be convicted by 2/3rds of the Senate to be removed from office, which they know will never happen. There's 0 consequences so they don't care.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Wait. Some winger SC Judge lied and is unethical? What?!! I just can't believe it.
Unethical person lies about ethics. No surprises there.
“For the last 30 years, as far as the records I’ve been able to find, the justices have been writing the same boilerplate language in their Senate Judiciary questionnaires, which to me is an indictment against the seriousness with which they take their ethical responsibilities,” said Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court.
It's not his fault, he was just copying the empty promises all the other nominees were making.
/s
Corrupt liar says what?
Supreme Court sticks it's head in the ground like an ostrich, and all accountability magically disappears.
Unlike most ostriches, however, in this case it actually works.
L I A R
Lol trust me my ethics are perfect, in fact people are saying the best ethics of all time! SCOTUS's honor.