Federal judges accept all-expense paid junkets to right-wing conferences

[IndianaGreen]

Federal judges accept all-expense paid junkets to right-wing conferences

Author: Special to the World
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 11/28/08 12:58

Federal judges were attending corporation-sponsored conferences at posh watering holes, at times on the very subjects of cases they have pending before them, a prominent law school dean wrote in a 2008 book of essays.

While at these sessions, “judges not only hear right wing views propagandized to them, but also hob nob with, speak with, drink with, play golf with, and sometimes even meet on Boards with right wing figures, right wing lawyers, and others who have pronounced right wing views,” said Lawrence Velvel, dean and cofounder of the Massachusetts School of Law at Andover.

“The conferences are paid for by rich right wing foundations – (Sarah) Scaife, of Pittsburgh, Pa., (Charles) Koch, of Arlington, Va. etc.--- and by wealthy, powerful companies involved regularly in litigation where their side is, at minimum, the conservative side,” he said. After attending these sessions, Vevel noted, judges “have been known to go back home and alter rulings on cases on the issues discussed at a one-sided conference.”

Velvel, who formerly worked as a lawyer in the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice in Washington, said, “one of the reasons antitrust is now of such little value in the U.S. is that the judiciary has adopted views taught at the right wing conferences.”

Writing about the seminars, Dorothy Samuels, a member of the editorial board of The New York Times on January 20, 2006, said the seminars are “underwritten by monied interests out to influence judges to rule in favor of corporate interests on issues like environmental protection and liability for harmful products.”

“Conducted under the innocuous sounding banner of ‘judicial education’,” Samuels added, “(i)n reality these slanted multi-day sessions mock the ideal of an independent, impartial judiciary…”

Some justices go beyond what The Times calls “conferenceering” by accepting costly gifts outright. Justice Clarence Thomas was cited by the paper because he “had accepted thousands of dollars in gifts in recent years, including an $800 leather jacket, a $1,200 set of tires from NASCAR, and an extravagant vacation from a conservative activist.”

http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/14073/

[louis-t]

1. Why is no one holding them accountable?

Isn't a judge accepting a gift from a political organization considered at the very least unethical? At worst illegal?

[MagickMuffin]

3. Sounds like good ol fashioned BRIBES to me

We can thank the Federalist Society for most of these "judges" being where they are today. I bet John Roberts and Sam Alito are among the crooks.

[Turbineguy]

2. I don't know if it's illegal or immoral

but it does cost those clowns to entertain those judges.

[MagickMuffin]

4. I guess this explains Thomas' silence on many decisions

Buying access, color me surprised.

:kick: & RRRRRRRRR

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. That's right. "Judicial education."

The corporate world is setting up quite a few of these seminar schools meant to teach government employees how to do their jobs. No conflict there. No siree.

[spirald]

6. Great! Impeach them.

Congress, with its new-found majority, should adopt a zero tolerance stance towards this influence peddling, no matter which side it involves.

It's a terrific opportunity to weed out cronies from the judiciary. If these people are stupid enough to engage in a clear conflict of interest like this without recusal, Congress would be delinquent if it didn't take this opportunity to extract these time bombs planted by the Right.

[bluedawg12]

7. If they want to attend biased rw CLE conferences

then they should not have their tuition or any component of the continuing legal education (CLE) expenses paid for by anyone but themselves.

There should be public disclosure of all gifts, expenses, junkets, etc. by judges, on-line, transparent, in order to determine if they should be recused from any case due to potential conflict of interest.

What a corrupt f*cking system we live in.

[stillcool]

8. scratch my back, I'll scratch yours..

I hope they get more out of it than 'thousands of dollars' in gifts. They should be getting a good chunk of stock in some of those corporations that they protect. Justice isn't cheap.

[Unsane]

9. Obama has 4-8 years to bring the RW federal judiciary back into balance.

I expect him to appoint young, common sense progressives to the federal bench.

[AtomicKitten]

10. The Justice Department is a huge mess now.

I suspect it will take some time to sort it out.