Ethics committee warns sitting federal judges not to affiliate with the Federalist Society

[applegrove]

Ethics committee warns sitting federal judges not to affiliate with the Federalist Society

on January 22, 2020

By Matthew Chapman at Raw Story

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/ethics-committee-warns-sitting-federal-judges-not-to-affiliate-with-the-federalist-society/

"SNIP....

On Wednesday, the Judicial Conference’s Codes of Conduct Committee, a national panel of high-ranking federal judges responsible for policy-making on U.S. courts, released a draft advisory opinion warning federal judges against affiliating with the Federalist Society, one of the nation’s foremost associations of conservative and libertarian lawyers.

“The Committee advises that formal affiliation with the ACS or the Federalist Society, whether as a member or in a leadership role, is inconsistent with Canons 1, 2, 4, and 5 of the Code,” stated the opinion. “Official affiliation with either organization could convey to a reasonable person that the affiliated judge endorses the views and particular ideological perspectives advocated by the organization; call into question the affiliated judge’s impartiality on subjects as to which the organization has taken a position; and generally frustrate the public’s trust in the integrity and independence of the judiciary.”

.....

The Federalist Society has long been known as a “pipeline” for Republican judicial nominees to be groomed and considered for the federal bench, including many of President Donald Trump’s appointees. Moreover, many sitting federal judges maintain close ties with the group — last year alone, 23 judges, all appointed by Republicans, spoke at the annual Federalist Society convention.

....SNIP"

[choie]

1. wow - people actually care about ethics...

who'd a thunk it?

[Igel]

2. And what's the ACS, you ask?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Constitution_Society

[applegrove]

3. I always thought Ginni Thomas' political activities were a kind of dominance

signaling meant to eat around the edges of judicial ethics. Not that a woman cannot have a career if her man has a important job but, if you are married to a judge, there are things you should not do, male or female.

[leftieNanner]

4. And both Thomas and Scalia attended

many right wing conferences and meetings that looked ethically marginal at best. But, since there are no judicial ethics rules for SCOTUS, they got away with it. That's ANOTHER thing I'd like us to change.

[applegrove]

5. +1

[ancianita]

6. Hilarious.

Ain't gonna happen.

[applegrove]

8. Don't create apathy.

[ancianita]

11. I'm sorry. You're right. No excuses.

On the serious side, though, it's like telling a Southern boy he can't eat Southern food. He'll still hang out with those who do.

What can judges do about their past associations, just cut them for life? Are they to check their "freedom of association" rights at the door of their homes, simply over "advisement"? They'll still be Federalist Society adjacent.

I agree with the advisement, and wish the Federalist Society were gone, but I see this more honored in the breach than the observance.

I'm sure they realize these things, yet take this stand as official policy.

[dem4decades]

7. Too late, aren't they all on the Federal bench now?

[Midnight Writer]

12. Hell, they are on the Supreme Court now.

[Six117]

9. Exactly... They will do what they want because they don't care

And know damn well there will be little to no repercussions for unethical behavior... How many scump appointees were rated not qualified by the ABA -and yet they are still "judges" in federal courts...

"The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.”

We're going to need some new tools.

[TeamPooka]

10. I have no trust in the integrity of the judiciary.