Scalia says Cheney can run a secret governement.

"Ragnar" wrote in message
...

"Krztalizer" wrote in message
...

It doesn't make Art wrong - in any other case, an officer of the court who
personally knows a principal in the case would/should stand aside and let
other
members of the court hear it.

A fishing trip is nothing close to incidental contact between jurist and
witness - Scalia should have been sensative to the perception of
impropriety
over his refusal to recuse himself.
\

And? His recusal would _sitill_ have resulted in a majority decision.

That doesn't matter. The public ought to have justices on the Supreme Court who
can recognize their own involvement with participants taking part in hearings
before them. Any justice who thinks that going on a fishing trip, or dining
regularly with one another, or exchanging family visits with litigants before
their bench is demonstrating a deplorable lack of judgement if he can categorize
that kind of behavior as incidental. Incidental contact to most of the public
is restricted to stuff like holding a door open for someone, or passing the salt
at a diner counter, or picking up and returning an envelope that the other
person has dropped. Going on fishing trips or dinner engagements or vacations
to the Caribbean together is a lot more than a casual contact. We expect our
Supreme Court justices to know the difference. If figuring it out is too
complicated for them, then it's time for them to resign from the bench or
retire.

George Z.