UPDATE - The Supreme Court: Ethical or Not? A Bunch of Ethically-Challenged Old Farts?

The Supreme Court: Ethical or Not? A  Look at the Past 20 Years

The Supreme Court has been a hot topic of debate for the past 20 years. Some people argue that they have been ethical, while others believe that they have not. In this article, we will explore the ethics of the Supreme Court and determine whether they have been living up to their reputation.

The Supreme Court is supposed to be an unbiased and impartial body that interprets the law and makes decisions based on the Constitution. However, in recent years, there have been concerns about the ethics of the Supreme Court. It seems that the justices have been playing fast and loose with their ethical responsibilities.

One of the biggest concerns is the issue of judicial recusal. Judicial recusal is when a judge removes themselves from a case because of a conflict of interest. In recent years, there have been cases where Supreme Court justices have refused to recuse themselves, even when it was clear that they had a conflict of interest. It's like they think they're above the law or something.

For example, in 2010, Justice Clarence Thomas did not recuse himself from a case involving the Affordable Care Act, even though his wife was a vocal opponent of the law. This raised concerns about his impartiality and ethics. It's like he was trying to stick it to Obama or something.

Another issue that has been raised is the influence of money on Supreme Court decisions. There have been cases where outside groups have spent millions of dollars on advertising campaigns to influence Supreme Court decisions. This has led to concerns about whether the Supreme Court is truly impartial or if they are swayed by outside interests. It's like they're more interested in lining their pockets than upholding justice.

Despite these concerns, there have also been instances where the Supreme Court has acted ethically. For example, in 2015, they legalized same-sex marriage, a decision that was widely praised for its ethics and fairness. It's like they finally got something right.

So, how ethical has the Supreme Court been in the past 20 years? The answer is complicated. While there have been instances where they have acted ethically, there have also been concerns about conflicts of interest and outside influences. As citizens, it is our responsibility to hold the Supreme Court accountable and ensure that they are acting in an ethical manner. It's like we need to be their conscience or something.

In a recent hearing on Supreme Court ethics reform, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) scolded Chief Justice John Roberts for the court's "oblivious" response to ethical conflicts facing its members. Durbin warned that the court's failure to adopt the same judicial code of conduct as every other federal court was undermining public confidence in the institution. It's like they think they're too good for the rules.

Of course, Roberts himself was not in attendance at the hearing, having declined an invitation from Durbin to appear. But that didn't stop Durbin from calling out the court's "Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices," which Roberts sent to the Judiciary Committee last week along with a letter declining an invitation to testify before the committee. Durbin dismissed the statement as a "defense of the status quo" that was "oblivious to the obvious." It's like they don't even care what we think.

But not everyone was on board with Durbin's criticisms. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the ranking member of the Judiciary panel, accused Democrats of trying to intimidate conservative members of the court. He even cited Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's (D-N.Y.) warning to conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch during a rally outside the Supreme Court in March of 2020 that they would release "the whirlwind" and "pay the price." It's like they're all just playing political games.

Graham went on to accuse liberals of waging an "assault" on conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, saying that it was all part of a larger effort to "delegitimize a conservative court." He even suggested that liberals were trying to "expand the number of justices to dilute the conservative majority that exists today." It's like they're all just trying to stack the deck in their favor.

But let's not forget about liberal Justice Elena Kagan, who Graham pointed out has raised "half a billion dollars for the law school" since leaving Harvard University's law school. He questioned whether Kagan would recuse herself from a case involving Harvard's affirmative action policies that is currently before the court. It's like everyone has their own agenda.

So what's really going on here? Is it a battle between conservatives and liberals, or is it simply a matter of upholding ethical standards? Perhaps it's a bit of both. But one thing is for sure: the Supreme Court has some work to do if it wants to restore public confidence in its ethical practices. As Durbin put it, "the status quo must change." It's like they need to get their act together before we lose faith in them completely.

In conclusion, the ethics of the Supreme Court are a complex issue that requires careful consideration. While there have been instances where they have acted ethically, there have also been concerns about conflicts of interest and outside influences. As citizens, it's up to us to hold them accountable and demand that they act in an ethical manner. It's like we need to be their conscience and remind them why they're there in the first place.

OR MAYBE THIS IS A BETTER EXAMPLE OF THE ETHICAL SUPREME COURT 

The Supreme Court: A Bunch of Ethically-Challenged Old Farts?

Let's be real, the Supreme Court is like that grandparent who always talks about how things were better back in their day. But when it comes to ethics, they might as well be living in the dark ages.

Sure, they're supposed to be unbiased and impartial, but it seems like they're more interested in playing favorites than upholding justice. It's like they're a bunch of kids on a playground, picking their friends to be on their team.

Take the issue of judicial recusal. It's like these justices have never heard of the phrase "conflict of interest." They'll just sit on a case even if their spouse is out there protesting against it. Talk about awkward family dinners.

And don't even get me started on the influence of money on Supreme Court decisions. It's like these justices will do anything for a quick buck. They might as well put a "For Sale" sign outside the courthouse.

But hey, it's not all bad news. Sometimes they get it right, like legalizing same-sex marriage. It's like they finally woke up from their nap and realized that it's not the 1800s anymore.

But let's be real, we can't just sit back and let them do whatever they want. We need to hold them accountable and demand that they act ethically. It's like we're their parents, trying to teach them right from wrong.

And don't even get me started on the recent hearing on Supreme Court ethics reform. It's like the justices think they're too good for the rules. They probably think they're above the law or something.

But it's not just the Supreme Court that's the problem. It's like everyone in politics is playing some sort of game. Liberals are trying to delegitimize conservative justices, while conservatives are accusing liberals of trying to stack the deck.

It's like they're all just trying to score points and win some sort of imaginary trophy. But what about the American people? What about justice and fairness?

It's time for the Supreme Court to step up and do what's right. It's time for them to stop playing favorites and start acting ethically. It's like they need a wake-up call or something.

So let's hold them accountable and demand that they act in the best interest of the American people. It's like we're their conscience, reminding them why they're there in the first place.

And who knows, maybe one day we'll look back and say, "Wow, those Supreme Court justices were actually pretty ethical." But until then, it's like we're stuck with a bunch of ethically-challenged old farts.