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

[Mark E. Smith]

PWW.ORG 11/28/08

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 co-founder 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, or 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, Velvel noted, judges "have been known to go back home and alter rulings on cases on the
issues discussed at the one-sided conference.

(Later ..)

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/

That would make a fascinating Senate hearing, Clarence Thomas discussing his acceptance of
gifts from interested parties.

[grannie4peace]

1. can congress investigate the judges?

i'd love to get rid of c thomas & a few others ---they probably shysters!!!

[geckosfeet]

2. I do believe that, judges are subject to impeachment for such offenses.

This would be corruption, selling influence, conflict of interest.

[trollybob]

3. Yes, except that Justice Thomas has never had an independent thought in his head.

He's only capable of signing his name to any opinion that has Justice Scalia's name on it. Anyway, the Federal Judiciary is so conservative as it is that they don't need any urging.