Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says she's open to an 'enforceable' Supreme Court ethic

[Gunny]

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says she's open to an 'enforceable' Supreme Court ethics code (nbcnews.com) (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/ketanji-brown-jackson-open-enforceable-ethics-code-rcna169149)

[fj1200]

She says with utmost confidence that she would never have action taken against her because of her politics.

[Gunny]

She says with utmost confidence that she would never have action taken against her because of her politics.

I'm going to ass-u-me here:

Was this simply about a code of ethics, I'm not sure there is a good argument why not. I really see no reason that Justices of the Supreme Court should not be held to a standard. However, who enforces it? Lower courts? Congress?

On the latter, and where my argument stands, is a code of ethics enforceable by outside agencies takes autonomy away from the Court and creates unequal balance in the separation of powers.

Where the assumption comes in is there is no doubt in my mind this would not be a set of rules to follow going forward. The Dems want to get some rules in writing then start going after any and everything they find an excuse to, starting with beginning of time. It's like everything else the left doesn't control. Just a constant, never ending assault until they find a crack somewhere they can shove their way into.

Meanwhile, the current lib Justice twit going on record about any things has yet to define "woman". But her interpretation of law is supposed to be okey-dokey:rolleyes:

[Kathianne]

I'm going to ass-u-me here:

Was this simply about a code of ethics, I'm not sure there is a good argument why not. I really see no reason that Justices of the Supreme Court should not be held to a standard. However, who enforces it? Lower courts? Congress?

On the latter, and where my argument stands, is a code of ethics enforceable by outside agencies takes autonomy away from the Court and creates unequal balance in the separation of powers.

Where the assumption comes in is there is no doubt in my mind this would not be a set of rules to follow going forward. The Dems want to get some rules in writing then start going after any and everything they find an excuse to, starting with beginning of time. It's like everything else the left doesn't control. Just a constant, never ending assault until they find a crack somewhere they can shove their way into.

Meanwhile, the current lib Justice twit going on record about any things has yet to define "woman". But her interpretation of law is supposed to be okey-dokey:rolleyes:

The Courts are the 3rd branch, not inferior to executive or legislative which is the game on this point.

[fj1200]

I'm going to ass-u-me here:

Was this simply about a code of ethics, I'm not sure there is a good argument why not. I really see no reason that Justices of the Supreme Court should not be held to a standard. However, who enforces it? Lower courts? Congress?

On the latter, and where my argument stands, is a code of ethics enforceable by outside agencies takes autonomy away from the Court and creates unequal balance in the separation of powers.

Where the assumption comes in is there is no doubt in my mind this would not be a set of rules to follow going forward. The Dems want to get some rules in writing then start going after any and everything they find an excuse to, starting with beginning of time. It's like everything else the left doesn't control. Just a constant, never ending assault until they find a crack somewhere they can shove their way into.

Meanwhile, the current lib Justice twit going on record about any things has yet to define "woman". But her interpretation of law is supposed to be okey-dokey:rolleyes:

SCOTUS is subjected to the same process of ethics enforcement as the POTUS and that is impeachment. In no way should they be subjected to another a lesser standard that is driven by politics; that would completely undermine the independence that the SCOTUS is supposed to have. It's populist drivel but this time coming from the left. That she does not apparently understand the rationale for an independent judiciary brings into question her ability act independently of political influence.