Sabocat
20th February 2004, 11:21
Some very interesting reading here. Talk about subversion of the legal system. <_<
Pay particular attention to the section regarding Scalia and the 2000 election.
Supreme Court Justice Scalia’s hunting trip with Cheney: the political and constitutional issues
By John Andrews and Barry Grey
20 February 2004
Following press reports of a private duck-hunting outing with Vice President Dick Cheney in January, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has refused to recuse himself from a case currently before the high court in which Cheney is a named party. Scalia has responded to questions about the hunting trip with provocative statements that underscore his contempt for the public and scorn for long-standing canons of judicial conduct.
Judicial ethics strictly prohibit judges from meeting privately with one of the sides to a dispute. When such a violation occurs, the judge is expected to withdraw from considering the case, a process known as recusal. Despite his clear violation of the rule, Scalia has cynically brushed off questions about his refusal to take himself off the case.
Read the rest... http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/feb2004/.../scal-f20.shtml (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/feb2004/scal-f20.shtml)
Pay particular attention to the section regarding Scalia and the 2000 election.
Supreme Court Justice Scalia’s hunting trip with Cheney: the political and constitutional issues
By John Andrews and Barry Grey
20 February 2004
Following press reports of a private duck-hunting outing with Vice President Dick Cheney in January, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has refused to recuse himself from a case currently before the high court in which Cheney is a named party. Scalia has responded to questions about the hunting trip with provocative statements that underscore his contempt for the public and scorn for long-standing canons of judicial conduct.
Judicial ethics strictly prohibit judges from meeting privately with one of the sides to a dispute. When such a violation occurs, the judge is expected to withdraw from considering the case, a process known as recusal. Despite his clear violation of the rule, Scalia has cynically brushed off questions about his refusal to take himself off the case.
Read the rest... http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/feb2004/.../scal-f20.shtml (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/feb2004/scal-f20.shtml)