 |
Thursday,
April 1, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
Impartiality
of justice a concern
Scalia
should recuse himself from energy case
In
case you haven’t heard, Supreme Court Justice Antonin
Scalia is doing his best to avoid pressure to recuse himself
from hearing a case concerning Vice President Dick Cheney.
The case in question surrounds the Bush administration’s
energy policy. Watchdog and Environmental groups, such
as the Sierra Club, are convinced that top industry executives
had a hand in shaping the policy and have filed a lawsuit
to learn more about the closed door sessions.
Cheney has combated the lawsuit, arguing that “executive
privilege” allows him to avoid disclosing such information.
Executive privilege goes back to President Nixon’s
day, and his attempt to avoid giving up court subpoenaed
audio tapes concerning his discussions about the Watergate
scandal. Obviously, the country and the court did not
follow suit, and the idea of executive privilege, which
is mentioned nowhere in the Constitution, did not save
Nixon’s presidency.
Now, however, Vice President Cheney might be able to pull
it off. Only three weeks after the lawsuit was filed Cheney
and Justice Scalia went duck hunting in Louisiana as guests
of Wallace Carline, the owner of Diamond Services, an
oil service company.
While the details of their conversation are really nobody’s
business, the heart of the issue is Scalia’s impartiality.
Supreme Court justices are expected to police themselves
if one of them is biased or “reasonably questioned.”
Scalia’s refusal to do so is an affront to our judicial
system.
If big oil companies are dictating our country’s
energy policies the public has a right to know. Scalia
should understand that and admit that his chummy relationship
with the vice president compromises his disposition. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
