Quote:
Originally posted by Superbelt
Scalia invited Cheney a year ago on an all expenses paid duck-hunting vacation. Everything was paid for. The jet, vacation and location were all provided by the owner of an oil rig service company, Wallace Carline. Cheney was already fighting in federal court to avoid revealing whether his energy policy, designed to funnel billions of dollars of taxpayer money to companies like Carline's, was largely created by the energy industry. It was obvious that the case would be appealed to the Supreme Court if Cheney lost.
Code of Conduct for US Judges.
QUACK, QUACK
There's a quote floating around of where Scalia defends the notion of the need for Judges to recuse themselves under the appearance of impropriety.
I'm having a hard time finding it though.
|
Did you read Scalia's memo? The Supreme Court does not act in the same way as other courts.
Quote:
|
“Let me respond, at the outset, to Sierra Club’s suggestion that I should “resolve any doubts in favor of recusal.” Motion to Recuse 8. That might be sound advice if I were sitting on a Court of Appeals. But see In re Aguinda , 241 F. 3d 194, 201 (CA2 2000). There, my place would be taken by another judge and the case would proceed normally. On the Supreme Court, however, the consequence is different: The Court proceeds with eight Justices, raising the possibility that, by reason of a tie vote, it will find itself unable to resolve the significant legal issue presented by the case. Thus, as Justices stated in their 1993 Statement of Recusal Policy: “[W]e do not think it would serve the public interest to go beyond the requirements of the stature, and to recuse ourselves, out of an excess of caution, whenever a relative is a partner in the firm before us or acted as a lawyer at an earlier stage. Even one unnecessary recusal impairs the functioning of the Court.” (Available in Clerk of Court’s case file.) Moreover, granting the motion is (insofar as the outcome of the particular case is concerned) effectively the same as casting a vote against the petitioner. The petitioner needs five votes to overturn the judgement below, and it makes no difference whether the needed fifth vote is missing because it has been cast for the other side, or because it has not been cast at all.
|
While a "normal" judge can be replaced, a Supreme Court Justice can not and any recusal changes the face of the process.
Further, your facts pertaining to the trip appear to be in error. The jet used on the trip down was US government property and the return trip was via commercial airline paid for by Scalia and his relatives.
If you're interested in Scalia quotes:
"If it is reasonable to think that a Supreme Court justice can be bought so cheap, the nation is in deeper trouble than I had imagined."