Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
The question serves the most valid of purposes: determining the truth. I find it unlikely that one of the keenest legal minds of our time failed, 6 years in a row, where TaxAct succeeds. Because of this, I believe he did this intentionally, and you don't do something like this intentionally without reason. Why would a Supreme Court Justice who's wife works for active political organizations in line with his political views choose not to include his wife's income? The answer to that question is the reason for my (I believe valid) concern.
This isn't a free speech issue at all. This is fundamental judicial responsibility, impartiality. The fact that Thomas' speaking engagement was funded by people who stood to gain a great deal with Citizens United suggests a possible conflict of interest. The fact that his wife's employer pushed for Citizens United suggests a possible conflict of interest.
My standard is being paid by people who gain directly from your decisions.
Tu quoque, ace.
|
I agree with all of the above, except the part about Thomas being one of the "keenest legal minds of our time."
His paid speech at a conservative/libertarian event organized by the Koch brothers was improper.
And his wife working for a political organization opposed to the Affordable Care Act is reason enough for Thomas to recuse himself when the law's constitutionality reaches the Court.
I would suggest both would violate canons of the
Code of Conduct for Federal Judicial Employees on "appearance of impropriety" issues alone.
Unfortunately, when the Code was adopted, the Supreme Court exempted itself and its employees.