I identify the oil extraction company very broadly as a litigant, which is a party engaged in a lawsuit. This is because they have an interest in the outcome and they had input in preparing the policy that is at the center of this lawsuit. If you don't like me using that word, pretend I'm not using it and instead replace it with "Party of Interest"
I have seen in several different places that this trip was paid for by the oil company.
Quote:
|
and you never answered the question with regard to all personal relationships that Justices will inevitably have and the supposed conflict they entail.
|
I am not sure what you are specifically looking for me to answer here. Please explain this out a bit more.
I don't ignore that a district justice is different from the Supreme Court. A dj can be replaced much more easily and thus should be able to be recused more easily. But a SC justice can also be recused and I believe the nature of the relationship and circumstances surrounding the vacation they took together (At one point Scalia did have Cheney "alone" with his son and son-in-law for a long period of time on a plane) falls under the notion of "impartiality being reasonably questioned".