Shouldn't a Justice of the Supreme Court know the law and observe ethical standards?
[theguardian.com]
Judges are only human - but some are more human than others. ... and the longer they hold office the more prone to "human" failings they become.
Governments are elected for fixed terms with national elections being held at regular intervals to try to prevent individual members of congress becoming too "human". (Not always successfully, unfortunately)
Surely, Supreme court judges should also be required to apply for re-appointment. Since there are nine members of SCOTUS, perhaps they need to be reconfirmed in sequence, one per year, giving a maximum of 9 years between confirmations (or otherwise).
The idea is that different branches of govt. have different systems of employment. Thus a better form of check and balance might be achieved. eg, US Congress is elected on a 2-year cycle whilst the Senate is 6 years. The idea behind a lifetime appointment is that it can remove a large incentive for party political bias. Many that would have been political lap dogs have found their teeth when freed from the election cycle. One only has to look to all the ex-Torys that have decried the present and former front bench from the Lords. Similarly, I seriously doubt if right-leaning SCOTUS members would have had the guts to rule against Trump's election bs if they had to face re-election. We know that the Senate and House sure didn't.
He rapidly moved up rank on my 'if I could magically eliminate 10 people' list.
Dumb as he is, he knew taking bribes was illegal. You only hide what you believe you need to.
Getting caught in a cover up is never a good look, is it?
nothing remain hiding forever.....