The Briefing Room
General Category => National/Breaking News => SCOTUS News => Topic started by: mystery-ak on August 03, 2023, 05:44:09 pm
-
August 3, 2023 11:29am EDT
Top Democrat tries to school Justice Alito in growing tiff over Supreme Court oversight
Justice Samuel Alito says the Constitution gives no authority to Congress to regulate the Supreme Court
By Brianna Herlihy | Fox News
A top Senate Democrat blasted Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito for expressing his views on a controversial bill to institute a mandatory code of conduct on the nation's highest tribunal.
"Let’s be clear: Justice Alito is not the 101st member of the United States Senate. His intervention in Article I activity is unwise and unwelcome," Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said in a statement Wednesday.
Durbin's comments come as a direct response to Alito, who in a recent Wall Street Journal interview criticized a new bill pushed by Durbin and his Democrat colleagues that would impose new ethics rules on the justices.
"Congress did not create the Supreme Court," Alito told the Journal, adding that the Constitution did.
"I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it," he said. "No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court — period," he added.
more
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-democrat-tries-school-justice-alito-growing-tiff-supreme-court-oversight
-
Call me silly, but when it comes to understanding the Constitution, I'd probably give Alito the edge over Turban Durbin.
-
Congress has the power of the purse.
////00000////
It would be a shame if the Justices had to drink instant coffee because Congress didn't appropriate the funds for whole bean coffee.
-
IL elects some of the stupidist SOB's known to man. Durbin, Duckworth, Kinselman, Obama.....
-
If Dick Durbin would like to challenge Marbury v. Madison (1803), he's welcome to try.
-
Alito is absolutely correct. As @Maj. Bill Martin has said, the most that a Congressionally enacted code of conduct for the Supreme Court could be was guidance as to what Congress might consider if it were to impeach a sitting Justice, but otherwise, outside of impeachment, such a code of conduct would not have any binding effect, in the sense that a Justice could be forced to comply with it.
The Supreme Court is master of its own discipline in that sense.
-
Could be dangerous. Since all branches are equal...could the Judicial branch enact a code of ethics on the Legislature?
Seems more target rich imho.
-
Alito is absolutely correct. As @Maj. Bill Martin has said, the most that a Congressionally enacted code of conduct for the Supreme Court could be was guidance as to what Congress might consider if it were to impeach a sitting Justice, but otherwise, outside of impeachment, such a code of conduct would not have any binding effect, in the sense that a Justice could be forced to comply with it.
The Supreme Court is master of its own discipline in that sense.
The weird thing about this is that Durbin, etc., has to know that, so why not just say it? "We're just putting the Court on notice as to what the Senate may consider to be "good behavior" moving forward. That way there are no surprises if a Justice engages in conduct that we already have said may be grounds for impeachment." It's a reasonable point with which Alito would likely agree, at least in principle.
Instead, we get something that misleads more than it enlightens.
-
The weird thing about this is that Durbin, etc., has to know that, so why not just say it? "We're just putting the Court on notice as to what the Senate may consider to be "good behavior" moving forward. That way there are no surprises if a Justice engages in conduct that we already have said may be grounds for impeachment." It's a reasonable point with which Alito would likely agree, at least in principle.
Instead, we get something that misleads more than enlightens.
Agreed.