Ephrat Livni, Quartz; An unseemly meeting at the US Supreme Court raises ethics questions
"“A case isn’t finished until the opinion is out,” Roth noted. So, any
meeting between a justice and an advocate who has expressed positions on
a matter is problematic because it undermines public trust in the
judge’s ability to be fair. He calls these engagements failures of a
“basic ethics test” and is concerned about how commonly these failures
occur...
Roth believes that everyone, whatever their political party or
ideological tendencies, should be concerned about these kinds of
engagements by the justices. And he doesn’t think it’s too much to ask
that members of the bench not interact with the people and institutions
who’ve broadcast their views in amicus briefs while those cases are
open, if only to maintain that precious appearance of neutrality."
Showing posts with label public trust in judge's ability to be fair. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public trust in judge's ability to be fair. Show all posts
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)