Will Justice Dept. Investigate Justices?

[b2r]

The liberal advocacy group Common Cause has asked the Justice Department to investigate what it says are potential conflicts involving two Supreme Court justices whose votes helped clear the way for unlimited campaign spending by corporations, unions and others.

www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=news&cd=1&ved=0CDIQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent.usatoday.com%2Fcommunities%2Ftheoval%2Fpost%2F2011%2F01%2Fliberal-group-fights-campaign-finance-decision-opposed-by-obama%2F1&ei=FdY5TY2RFonWtQPt49m1Aw&usg=AFQjCNHvkmU601jTOZSNLa0a6mWZabkRYQ

The advocacy group referred to political retreats sponsored by Koch Industries, a Wichita, Kan.-based energy company owned by brothers Charles and David Koch. Common Cause says the Koch Industries political action committee spent $2.6 million in the 2010 elections.

Common Cause president Bob Edgar said Thursday that if the department finds grounds for the disqualification of Scalia or Thomas, it should ask the Supreme Court to throw out the Citizens United judgment.

[billisonboard]

I do not believe that the executive branch should determine if there is conflict of interest in regards to the judical branch. If there were indications of impeachable offenses involving a Supreme Court Justice they would have to be investigated but conflict of interest, no.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Wouldnt some Senate committee be the ones doing any investigating of judges sitting on the Supreme Court or decisions and rulings. Like the Judiciary Committee.

[billisonboard]

Jan 21, 2011 14:38:47 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

Wouldnt some Senate committee be the ones doing any investigating of judges sitting on the Supreme Court or decisions and rulings. Like the Judiciary Committee.

Great point. That would certainly be more appropriate.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

That would certainly be more appropriate.

My take is this sort of committee would not want to touch anything of the sort with a ten foot pole.
Calling any sort of investigation of a supreme court justice(and possible removal) would be fraught with landmines and nothing but a quagmire.
It would open the door to an onslaught of politically motivated witch hunts.

[billisonboard]

Jan 21, 2011 14:58:04 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

That would certainly be more appropriate.

My take is this sort of committee would not want to touch anything of the sort with a ten foot pole.
Calling any sort of investigation of a supreme court justice(and possible removal) would be fraught with landmines and nothing but a quagmire.
It would open the door to an onslaught of politically motivated witch hunts.

The only exception I would see to that is if, in the process of an ongoing investigation of a situation, it became clear that a Supreme Court Justice was flat out taking money for decisions in a way that left no doubt in all but the most closed minds. I certainly hope that no such individual corrupt enough and/or stupid enough to get caught would ever be on the court.