Justice Barrett says Supreme Court ethics rules would be a 'good idea'
www.nbcnews.com
The conservative justice indicated support for a code of conduct similar to the one that applies to lower federal court judges.

The conservative justice indicated support for a code of conduct similar to the one that applies to lower federal court judges.

Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett indicated Monday she would support a code of conduct for the Supreme Court in the wake of recent claims that some justices have fallen short of required ethical standards.

Speaking at the University of Minnesota Law School, Barrett said it would be "a good idea for us do it" and suggested that the justices are broadly in support of a set of principles similar to those that lower court judges are required to follow.

"There is no lack of consensus among the justices. There's unanimity among all nine justices that we should and do hold ourselves to the highest ethical standards possible," she added.

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.worldEnglish
    13·
    1 year ago

    Jeez, I didn’t even make that strict of an oath when I married my fucking Domme! Sometimes people are wrong in an emergency or you have expertise or ethics that you can’t explain to the person due to time or ethical expectations of privacy. As humans we need to maintain a responsibility to disobey anyone in certain circumstances.

    Conservative Christians take their lifestyle bdsm too far and need to stop pushing it on others

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
      7·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, it's not like it was just part of the vows either.

      It was it's own like 5 minute thing, and once it was done, then they were allowed to exchange vows to get married.

      But she had to swear to obey him first.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        1 year ago

        Yeah like they make similar vows to us when they marry, the difference is ours are done with consent, understanding of the real world, alternatives available to us, and no gender based determination of role.

        Like when I’m not busy being disturbed by the fact that some guy has so much power over my country because his dumbass sub is a Supreme Court justice, it’s kinda funny how aggressively they never see the similarities.