CNN: "When a sitting judge, poised to hear a case
involving a particular litigant, goes on a vacation
with that litigant, reasonable people will question
whether that judge can be a fair and impartial
adjudicator of that man's case or his opponent's
claims," the senators wrote.
Cleanse the US Supreme Court of Cronyism, Show Up for
Democracy in 2004: Defeat Bush (again!)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/22/scalia.cheney.trip/index.html
Rehnquist questioned on Cheney-Scalia trip
WASHINGTON (CNN) --Two leading Democratic senators
asked Chief Justice William Rehnquist on Thursday
about the propriety of a hunting trip Supreme Court
Justice Antonin Scalia took with Vice President Dick
Cheney while Cheney has a case pending before the high
court.
In a letter to Rehnquist, Sens. Patrick Leahy of
Vermont and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut asked the
chief justice to tell them what "canons, procedures
and rules" are in place to determine when justices
should recuse themselves from cases.
They also asked Rehnquist what guidance justices have
been given about accepting trips, and whether the full
court has any way to disqualify a member from hearing
a case if a justice refuses to recuse himself.
"When a sitting judge, poised to hear a case involving
a particular litigant, goes on a vacation with that
litigant, reasonable people will question whether that
judge can be a fair and impartial adjudicator of that
man's case or his opponent's claims," the senators
wrote.
"The integrity of our courts and the confidence of the
American people depend on judges acting without fear
or favor."
Leahy is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary
Committee. Lieberman is the ranking Democrat on the
Senate Governmental Affairs Committee and a 2004
presidential candidate.
In December, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Cheney's
appeal of a lower court ruling ordering him to
disclose details of meetings between his energy policy
task force and contacts in the energy industry.
The vice president's lawyers contend that information
is protected by executive privilege.
The two groups that brought the suit, Judicial Watch
and the Sierra Club, insist the records should be made
public so they can determine whether lobbyists for the
energy industry helped craft the administration's
energy policy.
Earlier this month, Cheney invited Scalia, an old
friend, to accompany him on a hunting trip in
Louisiana.
The two also dined together along with Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at a restaurant on
Maryland's Eastern Shore in November.
In a letter to the Los Angeles Times, which first
disclosed details of the trip, Scalia defended his
actions, saying they did not threaten his
impartiality.
He said social contacts between high-level
administration officials and judges "have never been
thought improper" in situations where a judge is
considering a case involving actions an official took
in his "official capacity," rather than his "personal
capacity."
Cheney is not personally liable in the task force case
and would not face financial damages if he loses.
The groups involved in the lawsuit question whether
the trip was proper given Cheney's business before the
court -- questions echoed by Lieberman and Leahy in
their letter to Rehnquist.
"While judges should not be isolated from the society
in which they live, they must take special care that
their extra-judicial activities do not create a
conflict with their judicial duties," they wrote.
"Setting aside any evidence of actual bias, the
ethical rules recognize that the perpetuation of an
appearance of partiality is a threat to public
confidence in our federal courts."
Members of Congress who have questions about whether
actions they are about to take might violate ethics
rules can ask for advisory opinions in advance.
The senators asked Rehnquist to tell them whether the
Supreme Court has a similar mechanism, and whether
Scalia used it before accepting the trip with Cheney.
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/22/scalia.cheney.trip/index.html