Conflict of interest?
Hey, eriss, it appears that Judge Taylor isn't a protected species after all...
Conflict of Interest Is Raised in N.S.A. Ruling
The federal judge who ruled last week that President Bush’s eavesdropping program was unconstitutional is a trustee and an officer of a group that has given at least $125,000 to the American Civil Liberties Union in Michigan, a watchdog group said Tuesday.
The group, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization here that found the connection, said the link posed a possible conflict for the judge, Anna Taylor Diggs, and called for further investigation.
“The system relies on judges to exercise good judgment, and we need more information and more explanation about what the court’s involvement was in support of the A.C.L.U.,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, which gained attention in the 1990’s for ethics accusations against President Bill Clinton.
Three legal ethicists interviewed said although Judge Taylor’s role as a trustee for a supporter of the civil liberties group would not necessarily disqualify her from hearing the case, she should have probably disclosed the connection in court to avoid any appearance of a conflict.
The money that went to the ACLU, according to the article, was for completely unrelated programs and distributed since 1999.
This strikes me as grasping at straws to try to discredit a decision that gets in the way of a power-hungry swipe at some of the basic freedoms we, as U.S. citizens, are promised by the Constitution. I have yet to see the actual legal angle of the ruling discussed or picked apart in great detail (closest I saw was the last set of articles I posted that took the harsh language of the ruling to task--not the base legal sense).
Still (and unfortunately), this may be enough to make enough of the general public write off the ruling as some crazy, left-wing, commie, activist judge doing her best to destroy America and support the terrorists.
Conflict of Interest Is Raised in N.S.A. Ruling
The federal judge who ruled last week that President Bush’s eavesdropping program was unconstitutional is a trustee and an officer of a group that has given at least $125,000 to the American Civil Liberties Union in Michigan, a watchdog group said Tuesday.
The group, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization here that found the connection, said the link posed a possible conflict for the judge, Anna Taylor Diggs, and called for further investigation.
“The system relies on judges to exercise good judgment, and we need more information and more explanation about what the court’s involvement was in support of the A.C.L.U.,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, which gained attention in the 1990’s for ethics accusations against President Bill Clinton.
Three legal ethicists interviewed said although Judge Taylor’s role as a trustee for a supporter of the civil liberties group would not necessarily disqualify her from hearing the case, she should have probably disclosed the connection in court to avoid any appearance of a conflict.
The money that went to the ACLU, according to the article, was for completely unrelated programs and distributed since 1999.
This strikes me as grasping at straws to try to discredit a decision that gets in the way of a power-hungry swipe at some of the basic freedoms we, as U.S. citizens, are promised by the Constitution. I have yet to see the actual legal angle of the ruling discussed or picked apart in great detail (closest I saw was the last set of articles I posted that took the harsh language of the ruling to task--not the base legal sense).
Still (and unfortunately), this may be enough to make enough of the general public write off the ruling as some crazy, left-wing, commie, activist judge doing her best to destroy America and support the terrorists.