Elon Musk ridiculed a blind person on X. Then a mob went to work.; The Washington Post, February 18, 2025

Pranshu Verma, The Washington Post ; Elon Musk ridiculed a blind person on X. Then a mob went to work

[Kip Currier: Elon Musk repeatedly shows us exactly who and what he is: the richest person on the planet and a man who is to be pitied for the severe impoverishment of character, decency, and ethical principles from which he suffers.

We can't easily counter the hate speech, disinformation, and chaos that are the democracy-damaging byproducts of this wannabe-Bond-villain's amoral philosophical approach to life. But we can support the brave souls whom Musk and his minions ruthlessly target with their cyberbullying and scare tactics.

Thanks to all those willing to stand up for the rule of law, fairness, accountability, truth, service to those in need, and human dignity.]

[Excerpt]

"Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette works at the Project on Government Oversight,a nonpartisan watchdog group focused on reducing bureaucratic waste. He also happens to be blind. So when he criticized Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service in testimony on Capitol Hill last week, Musk unleashed an online attack Hedtler-Gaudette described as “surreal” in its juvenile bigotry.

First, Musk retweeted a post on X noting that the “blind director of watchdog group funded by George Soros testifies that he does not see widespread evidence of government waste” and added two laughing/crying emojis. The tweet garnered more than 21 million views, and sparked dozens of hateful messages to Hedtler-Gaudette’s account...

Digital rights experts say the situation has created an unprecedented imbalance in power. Musk’s massive online following, his ownership of a social media platform where he can dictate content moderation rules, and his position heading a government entity with access to private data, give him a unique ability to threaten those who question him and chill dissenting speech."

Outside groups take a first stab at a Supreme Court ethics code; NPR, March 9, 2023

Nina Totenberg, NPR; Outside groups take a first stab at a Supreme Court ethics code

"The recommendations

It recommends "clear and more stringent guidelines for recusal, prohibitions against conduct that creates an appearance of partiality, rigorous obligations for disclosure, and standards for transparent decision-making."In particular, for instance, the model code would require justices to disqualify themselves from cases involving not only financial entanglements of family members, but lobbying activities of would-be litigants involved in a justice's confirmation. And it would bar close family members from engaging in political or other activity that presents the appearance of partisanship.

The proposed code would go further than the existing code for lower court judges, which bars participation in political activities. The proposal would also bar Supreme Court justices from appearing before groups with partisan or ideological agendas, groups like the conservative Federalist Society or the liberal American Constitution Society. And it would recognize that certain political activities by a spouse or other close family members would require justices to recuse themselves."