Absquatulando |
|
|
On & Offline Musings and Maunderings
G*O*D
Archives
|
Sunday, February 08, 2004
Quack Quack :: Free Rides, ex parte Hunting buds, Cheney & Scalia go for the gusto The small Gulfstream jet that took the place of Air Force 2 for that landing on a small airstrip in southern Louisiana near that private hunting camp owned by a private oil-services company seems to have been the company's as well. This gives new meaning to "free ride." On the other hand, let's not be too harsh. If you're an oil-related company and an oil-related vice president, what's more sensible than to grease the wheels a little? The only question is whether, sooner or later, the Veep and his duck-hunting buddy -- and don't mistake me here, I think duck tastes delicious -- get caught in the slick. Could this, in other words, turn into a political Exxon Valdez TomDispatch Edward Lazarus notes: Given The Facts, It's Reasonable to Question Scalia's Impartiality Is it "reasonable" to question Scalia's impartiality under these circumstances? Certainly many editorialists, and some Democratic Senators (with their own political motivations, of course) say yes. Scalia, however, says no. According to the Justice, "social contacts with high-level executive officials (including cabinet officials) have never been thought improper for judges who may have before them cases in which those people are involved in their official capacities, as opposed to their personal capacities." In Scalia's view, his duck hunting trip was no different than the common practice of justices attending White House dinners - and, thus, he has declined to step off Cheney's case. ..... The Appearance of Corruption Is, and Should Be, Legally Sufficient For Recusal ..... Particularly in light of the Justices' tradition of liberally recusing themselves from cases in which their impartiality might be questioned, Scalia is suffering from a profound case of denial in remaining on Cheney's case. Fortunately, there is still time for him to change his mind. If he did so, not only would he very publicly reaffirm the Court's integrity, but he would also show that individual Justices, even headstrong ones like Scalia, are open-minded enough to change their minds when it is warranted. Edward Lazarus writes about, practices, and teaches law in Los Angeles. A former federal prosecutor, he is the author of two books - most recently, Closed Chambers: The Rise, Fall, and Future of the Modern Supreme Court.
Comments:
Post a Comment
|