The facts: (a) A right-wing politician makes an indecent proposal in the National Review regarding the Supreme Court. (b) An intellectual judge, responding to this silly proposal, then calls out the politician on his personal blog–a wonderful blog, by the way, called “Hercules and the Umpire“–opining that the politician is “demonstrably unfit to become President.” (c) A right-wing law professor, in turn, chimes in, “surreplying” to the judge on a right-wing legal blog (The Volokh Conspiracy), accusing our friend the judge of violating Canon 5 of the Judicial Code of Conduct, which prohibits judges from “publicly endorsing or opposing a candidate for public office.” So, what’s the remedy here? Admonition? (Boring.) In any case, to the extent the act of voting (like the act of blogging or talking) is a public act, one could argue that Canon 5, taken literally, thus prohibits judges from voting!
- 369,210 hits
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
Blogs I Follow