by Prof. Monroe Freedman, Hofstra Law School
"In Justice Thomas’ case, his wife, Ginny, is a lobbyist for organizations that oppose the health care act, and his family’s income derives in significant part from those lobbying activities. Thomas' wife has a unique opportunity for improper ex parte contacts with the justice. In addition, her success as a lobbyist encourages contributions to her organizations and enhances the justice’s family income. Not only might a reasonable person question the justice’s impartiality, therefore, but a number of reasonable people have in fact done so."
'via Blog this'
'via Blog this'
No comments:
Post a Comment