• Jaysyn@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the same time, Thomas is beholden to the same Federal Corruption laws that any other federal employee is.

      • halferect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I thought they voted that the scotus is not beholden to the same federal laws as other judges or other federal employees. At this point the only people who can hold them accountable is congress.

        • MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          The judicial ethics code is self imposed by the Judicial Conference of the US (created by Congress), which does not impose those rules upon the Supreme Court. I do not know whether they have the authority to do so. The Supreme Court up until this scandal, had refused to implement their own ethics policy. And the one that they recently adopted is weak, both in terms of requirements and enforcement.

          • halferect@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            OK, I guess what I was thinking was their ethics policy which I recall being laughably weak basically saying if you are naughty nothing will happen. Thanks for clearing that up

      • GlendatheGayWitch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If he was found guilty of a crime, couldn’t he then be removed from office? The Constitution says that they “shall hold their Office during Good Behavior”. Surely being convicted of a crime would be the opposite of “Good Behavior” and disqualify them from office.

    • juicy@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      DOJ may not be able to do anything about Justices taking money from plaintiffs or other ethics violations, but they can certainly enforce the tax code.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s the part I’m interested in, I’df there’s really a tax issue. Maybe he really didn’t understand justices had to have ethics and morals, avoid corruption and conflicts of interest, and were just there to solicit gifts from plaintiffs, but how can he explain away if he didn’t pay taxes?