Although the official title of a member of the US Supreme Court is "justice," some Supreme Court members have made a mockery of that term by going against basic principles of legal ethics
It is widely believed that Justice Antonin Scalia will be the next chief justice if George Bush wins a second term. But a number of recent incidents call Scalia's ethics into question.
Vice President Dick Cheney had to answer accusations over his involvement in the energy task force in court last year. It was later revealed that Cheney and Scalia had spent a few days duck hunting together at a private camp in southern Louisiana at the same time that Scalia was hearing Cheney's case, which brought Scalia's impartiality into question, leading to calls that he recuse himself from the case.
This was not the first time Scalia had assisted the Bush-Cheney team. It was Scalia's judgment that helped uphold their claims about the Florida polls in the 2000 US presidential elections. Scalia heard the case even though his son was a member of a law firm that was working for Bush.
Such behavior have led some to suggest that Scalia and others should really be called "injustices." Even TV programs have ridiculed Scalia, and thereby brought into public question the impartiality of the Supreme Court.
When Franklin Roosevelt was president, he often negotiated bills with justice Felix Frankfurter. During the Truman administration, chief justice Fred Vinson played the role of political consultant for Harry Truman. But the most scandalous was Abe Fortas.
Fortas was a well-known attorney. He was Lyndon Johnson's long-time friend, and managed his legal affairs. When Johnson became president, he appointed Fortas to the Supreme Court, replacing associate justice Arthur Goldberg in 1965. When chief justice Earl Warren announced his retirement in June 1968, Johnson nominated Fortas to replace Warren.
Despite his position, Fortas did not change his political habits, and often went to the White House to discuss important national issues with Johnson. He offered his opinions on issues ranging from the Vietnam War to elections.
According to Alexander Charns's book Cloak and Gavel: FBI Wiretaps, Bugs, Informers and the Supreme Court, the most unbelievable incident involving Fortas was when he volunteered to be an informer for FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. Subsequently, he often exchanged secrets with the FBI deputy director.
However, Fortas' confirmation as chief justice by the Senate ran into trouble because Fortas exceeded his designated powers under the Constitution. Under intense congressional scrutiny, Fortas resigned, marking one of the darkest periods in the court's history.
So much for US Supreme Court justices. In Taiwan, where justices are more partisan than those in the US, can we boast that our justices never exceed their powers? Are all our justices as pure as the driven snow?
Not if you believe independent legislator Su Ying-kuei (
He has no need to hold back. Instead, he should tell the public everything he knows, and reveal the "black hand" -- if there is such a person -- that caused two grand justices to act in such an unethical fashion.
As for his trivial excuses for not divulging the justices' identities, Su should keep these to himself, lest he make himself a laughingstock.
Wang Chien-chuang is president of The Journalist magazine.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations