fbpx
Connect with us

As I See It

SUPCO needs ethics rules more than ever

Published

on

There sure is a lot of job security being a justice on the Supreme Court. When you get the job, you get it for life, and even if you aren’t good at your job, you still get to keep it. We have seen plenty of examples. Justice Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito received lavish gifts and hospitality from conservative donors, some of which were not reported. Alito took a luxury fishing vacation with a hedge fund billionaire that would have cost you and I upwards of $100,000. Thomas, according to the watchdog group Fix the Court, has accepted a total of 193 gifts totaling more than $4 million since 2004. Then there is the matter of the upside-down flag at the home of Justice Alito, who refuses to recuse himself in cases involving Donald Trump. Whether a justice should recuse themselves is entirely left to them. There is no real code of conduct in today’s Supreme Court. A bill to require the Supreme Court to adopt a code of conduct and a way to enforce it died in the Senate last week. So much for reform. Clearly the court needs some guiding principles, because the only guiding principle right now seems to be wads of cash and piles of gifts.

Scott Robert Shaw serves as WIZM Program Director and News Director, and delivers the morning news on WKTY, Z-93 and 95.7 The Rock. Scott has been at Mid-West Family La Crosse since 1989, and authors Wisconsin's only daily radio editorial, "As I See It" heard on WIZM each weekday morning and afternoon.

Continue Reading
6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. nick

    June 18, 2024 at 6:36 am

    The Senate which has no ethics are going to legislate ethics for the Supreme Court?

  2. Char

    June 18, 2024 at 6:42 am

    YOU and others need to look at ALL of the Justices if you are going to be fair. But then, you and others are NOT fair. You don’t seem to care that some support members of the court leek rulings before they are final. You don’t care that justices are threatened AT THEIR HOMES. You don’t seem to remember that some liberal justices cannot tell you what a woman is, nor do they recuse themselves from some obvious conflicts of interest.

    Look at ALL of the justices, not just some of them, Mr Shaw.

  3. copus

    June 18, 2024 at 7:45 am

    if its not your way its not right, is that what you are saying? because the left hates the constitution so the supreme court is bad unless they are voting For murdering babies?

  4. Come On Man

    June 18, 2024 at 8:31 am

    So Mr. Shaw, former President Trump got a fair trial by an impartial judge who openly supports the Democratic party and his daughter who works closely for that party? Why did he not recuse himself?
    Mr. Shaw you are a journalist who is blind and condescending.
    You are an embarrassment to the true journalist from the past like Walter Cronkite and David Brinkley.
    I do agree that “all” forms of government should be subject to term limits. If the the office of the president has term limits why is everyone else exempt?
    There are times when you show a sliver of impartiality but then you never fail to disappoint by returning to your true colors of being a one sided party reporting journalist.
    You are an embarrassment to the profession of journalism.

  5. Walden

    June 18, 2024 at 9:51 am

    Ethics rules for the WI supreme court would be nice also, so too with journalists and school superintendents.

  6. LG

    June 20, 2024 at 9:18 am

    Being able to “keep” the job for life is prescribed by the American Constitution. The founders were very intelligent when they created the constitution and it is not to be altered. That said, The other checks and balances with a free press media that does its job is supposed to prevent unqualified people from being named to the Supreme Court. This worked beautifully in the case of Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. It is what it is Scott Robert Shaw. I do find it interesting you only pick the more conservative justices to criticize. The so-called liberal justices don’t seem to know the Constitution nearly as well and one of them can’t even define a woman in some think, the mighty federal government should decide abortion as opposed to the several states. I wish you could pretend to have some level of objectivity. I tend to be more conservative, leaning, but as a Libertarian, I am critical of both parties. You should consider similar objectivity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *