…but since he won’t, our work continues. Most notably this month, Fix the Court:
– Rang in the start of the new term by calling out SCOTUS for its lack or transparency in this statement and in this op-ed in Broadcasting & Cable magazine (sub. req.), which lamented, “While those unable to attend high holiday services could stream the ecclesiastical action before the high court of heavenly justice online, only a few hundred souls in Washington were able to experience the gaveling in of the high court of American justice”
– Applauded the fact that, for the first time in memory, a justice acknowledged from the bench the value of the financial disclosure rules that members of the high court must follow. Our response: Congress should take note and go one step further by ensuring the jurists also abide by the same ethics, travel and stock ownership rules that the rest of the federal government follows
– Pushed for inclusion of a SCOTUS term limits question in the Oct. 9 presidential debate, which, though didn’t get asked (it could tomorrow!), with our help garnered the sixth most votes out of 3.7 million cast
– Noted that the Oct. 11 Samsung v. Apple case included amicus briefs signed by four companies whose shares (up to $215,000 worth) are owned by Justices Roberts, Breyer and Alito
– Wrote an op-ed in the New York Times on Oct. 11 about the court’s “self-referential docket,” whereby the justices are hearing cases about recusals, ethics, mandatory retirement ages and the like yet fail to incorporate their pro-accountability rulings to improve their own institution’s shortcomings
– Responded to the couple of law professors who took issue with the op-ed (namely assertions about Justice Kagan’s and Roberts’ perceived conflicts), reminding them that the high court has a long way to go when it comes to implementing and abiding by best practices in judicial ethics
There’s much more to come!