Letters to the Editor: Justice Samuel Alito’s appalling ethical failure at the Supreme Court
To the editor: In the late 1970s, I was a newly appointed commissioner to a county board. I went to lunch with a staffer to learn more about how the agency worked. To thank him, I offered to pay for his lunch — no more than $15. He let me know in no uncertain terms that he was not allowed to accept gifts. (“Supreme Court controversy over Alito, Thomas free trips began with Justice Scalia,” June 21)
Today I am on the board of an affordable housing nonprofit. At each meeting we have to disclose whether we have a conflict of interest regarding any of the items on the agenda.
For Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. to think he has no duty to report six-figure gifts is beyond comprehension. For him to actually continue to hear and vote on cases in which the donor was involved makes a mockery of judicial integrity. For him to write that he has no duty to recuse himself says all we need to know about his integrity.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the time is long overdue for you to make ethics a priority at the Supreme Court.
Chris Soltow, Thousand Oaks
..
To the editor: The United States has a code of conduct that applies to all federal judges. These rules of reason — or Canons, as they are called — provide guidance on a variety of outside activities as well as the performance of the judges’ official duties.
It seems to me that the highest court in our land should at least attempt to maintain and enforce high standards of conduct.
The code states that “a judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities,” and that a judge “should personally observe those standards, so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved.”
I think the justices should re-read these Canons, as they are rapidly losing their integrity and their independence. It appears they have no ethical conscience or morality left.
Sheryl Kinne, Van Nuys
..
To the editor: Alito justifies his flight on a private jet and time at a $1,000-plus per night lodge — which he describes as “comfortable but rustic” — as being exempt from reporting requirements because the trip was based on “personal hospitality.”
Alito is quoted as saying that he has spoken with the billionaire donor Paul Singer “on no more than a handful of occasions.”
Singer must be generous in the extreme, at least to Supreme Court justices, if he spends tens of thousands of dollars on persons to whom he has spoken only occasionally.
Ed Schoch, Westchester
