a gift of free bagels and lox from high school friends. The real question was whether any justices at the center of the ethics maelstrom would follow through on the promises of the court’s “statement.” It seems the answer is no.Which is, of course, the entire problem with the unenforceable ethics guidelines that the chief justice offered up to the Senate Judiciary Committee in place of an actual code.
Yet the guidelines use voluntary language throughout, hedging at every turn to avoid committing the justices to any explicit mandate. For example, the recusal provision at issue incontains a hazy qualification that “in some cases, public disclosure of the basis for recusal would be ill-advised,” giving the example of “circumstances that might encourage strategic behavior by lawyers who may seek to prompt recusals in future cases.”Whatever that hedge means, it surely does not apply here.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: PennLive - 🏆 463. / 53 Read more »