 Views & Opinions |
Views & Opinions |
|
|
In a recent op-ed, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito defended himself against charges that he failed to disclose gifts from wealthy Republican donors and that he didn't recuse himself when matters involving the donor's interests came before the court. "Alito has unwittingly revealed a culture of concealment that can only damage the Court's declining reputation," writes Northwestern University law professor Steven Lubet. |
Alito doesn't dispute that he accepted gifts in the form of extravagant vacations. Rather, he takes issue with the idea that he was required to disclose the gifts and that his impartiality as a judge could be undermined. Full disclosure of gifts "should be a justice's default position," says Lubet, "rather than a grudging concession made only when there is no alternative." Alito asserts that he followed the "standard practice" of the Supreme Court. Lubet believes that's a big part of the problem. The Alito revelation follows scrutiny over Justice Clarence Thomas's failure to disclose gifts from wealthy donors and failure to recuse himself from cases tied to his benefactors. A bigger problem, argues Lubet, "is that Alito, like every other justice, arrogates the decision exclusively to himself. The practice of assigning recusal rulings solely to the affected justice is one of the most serious ethics issues confronting the Supreme Court, and Alito invokes it without embarrassment, insisting that the public must unquestioningly trust his appraisal of his own impartiality." No one is accusing the justices of outright favor-trading. But "Justices who have enjoyed the trappings of wealth may identify, consciously or otherwise, with the welfare of their moneyed companions." "Supreme Court justices no doubt believe they are immune to such effects," says Lubet. But an institution that prides itself on transparency and impartiality must do better. Read the op-ed at TheHill.com. |
Welcome to The Hill's Views & Opinions newsletter, it's Friday, June 23. I'm Daniel Allott, bringing together a collection of key opinion pieces published from a wide range of voices. |
|
|
Op-eds exploring key issues affecting the U.S. and world: |
|
|
By Sheldon Jacobson, professor in computer science at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign |
With any event that entails a high level of risk, stuff happens. As much as preparations can be made to mitigate such risks, the biggest risks are not what can be prepared for but those no one can envision. Such unknown risks are present in all situations, with most exceedingly rare. |
| |
|
By Husain Haqqani, former Pakistani ambassador to the U.S. |
Officials from the United States and India occasionally have some difficult private conversations about Ukraine and India's domestic politics. But the official state visit this week by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the U.S. will mainly be about showcasing the strength of the two countries' burgeoning partnership. |
| |
|
By Stephen Mumme, professor of political science at Colorado State University |
Whether or not Abbott's concern for migrants is at all sincere, his aggressive new migrant prevention measure brazenly flouts the international treaty governing the management of the Rio Grande River. |
| |
|
By Seth Cropsey, founder and president of Yorktown Institute |
President Joe Biden and his closest advisors believe that their role is to win a war of words, and that the hard edge of statecraft — military force — is an aberration, not a fundamental reality of international politics. |
| |
|
Opinions related to pivotal issues and figures in the news: |
|
|
You're all caught up. See you next time! |
Views expressed by contributors are theirs and not the opinion of The Hill. Interested in submitting an op-ed? Click here. |
1625 K Street NW, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20006 |
Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. | All Rights Reserved. |
|
|
|
If you believe this has been sent to you in error, please safely unsubscribe.
No comments:
Post a Comment