Judicial ethics, an oxymoron; The rule of law, another oxymoron

Balls & Strikes:

Court Order: It Is Unethical for Judges to Talk 

About Justice Sam Alito’s Unethical Behavior

In May 2024, the New York Times revealed that Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito had flags affiliated with far-right extremist movements flying outside of his residences. Alito’s conduct triggered widespread demands for higher judicial ethics standards and meaningful enforcement when those standards are breached. And last week, the legal system actually meted out some discipline in relation to the incident…but not to Alito. Chief Judge Albert Diaz of the Fourth Circuit issued an order on December 10 finding that a federal judge violated ethical rules by publicly acknowledging Alito’s clear lapses in ethical judgment.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday that the target of the disciplinary measures was Michael Ponsor, a Senior Judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Ponsor published an essay in the New York Times over the summer titled “A Federal Judge Wonders: How Could Alito Have Been So Foolish?” This was a very good question. The foolishness at issue was an upside-down American flag—a symbol adopted by proponents of overthrowing the 2020 election on the false grounds that it was “stolen” from Donald Trump—which neighbors spotted in front of Alito’s Virginia home in the days following the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol. Two years later, people saw an “Appeal to Heaven” flag—an obscure emblem of Christian theocrats—hoisted high at Alito’s New Jersey vacation home.

When a Supreme Court justice is exposed as a conspiracy-addled, antidemocratic reactionary, it becomes a bit more difficult for the Court to maintain its reputation as an impartial administrator of equal justice for all. Yet, somehow, Alito has faced no consequences for his misconduct, while Ponsor’s discussion of that misconduct gave rise to an ethical inquiry conducted by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court’s determination that Ponsor violated ethics rules by publishing criticism of Alito shows that the judiciary is much less concerned with meeting ethical standards than it is with maintaining a myth that the standards are met.

 No wonder public trust in the US systems of courts is low. ~65% don't have much or any trust. That level of distrust was earned and is deserved. 

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

At least for rich and/or powerful people and corporate people, the rule of law is fading away. The Lever:

The Biden Justice Department just handed a sweetheart deal to a global consulting firm with deep ties to the Biden administration, letting the firm off the hook for its role in helping “turbocharge” sales of the highly addictive prescription pain pill OxyContin.

The development is one of the Justice Department’s first major moves since adopting a new policy three weeks ago to go even softer on corporate crime, and will allow McKinsey & Company to defer prosecution for its extensive role in fueling the opioid epidemic that has devastated millions of American lives.

The new Justice Department policy is meant to provide leniency to corporations that cooperate with federal investigations and self-report crimes. But now McKinsey is benefiting from the new policy, even though prosecutors said that the consulting firm worked to obstruct their investigation.

The McKinsey settlement comes as federal prosecution of white-collar crimes hits historic lows, signaling that corporate malefactors can likely expect lenient treatment moving forward, no matter the extent and heinousness of their alleged crimes.

Although federal contracts with McKinsey for consulting work have shrunk recently, payments to consulting firms make up a massive portion of federal spending. The Biden administration requested more than $70 billion in federal funds for consulting work in the 2024 budget, with the Defense Department requesting nearly half of those funds, according to an analysis by antitrust expert Matt Stoller.

On Dec. 13, the Justice Department announced that McKinsey will be able to pay $650 million and enter into a five-year deferred-prosecution agreement in order to settle criminal and civil investigations into the firm’s role in helping Purdue Pharma “turbocharge” sales of OxyContin. According to prosecutors, the company was accused of “knowingly destroying records, documents, and tangible objects with the intent to impede, obstruct, and influence the investigation.” A former senior partner at McKinsey agreed to plead guilty to destroying documents and other evidence that investigators sought.  

McKinsey’s settlement comes just three weeks after a new Justice Department policy update allows corporations accused of crimes to receive lenient sentences for cooperating with investigators, even if those corporations are the target of multiple overlapping investigations and consistently break the law.

This new, fun-filled "law enforcement" policy stinks of Merrick Garland. He's the guy who successfully acted to protect DJT from federal prosecutions. Now he protects McKinsey and other major criminal operations.

America desperately needs a new political party. One that is honest, competent, transparent, pro-public interest and pro-democracy. Unfortunately, American is not going to get that hypothetical new party. We're stuck with the two odious beasts we have now.