Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Salty, Jun 23, 2010.
Ask the judge
Would this be considered to be "judicial activism"?
No - it falls under the heading of checks and balances
The judge has a Hummer and needs lots of gas. :laugh:
Sure it is judicial activism ... but then what court decision is not activism in one way or another?
Of course not Ken, that only applies when conservative rulings are involved.
In other words, if we like it it is checks and balances, if we don't like it it is judicial activism.
Judge Who Nixed Drilling Ban Had Oil Investments
Looks like a conflict of interest to me. Ethically he should have removed himself from the case.
How did you reach this conclusion?
The report provided no information as to the extent of his investment holdings.
You didn't read the report! The amount was shown in the 2nd paragraph.
Anyway, the amount does not matter. To own stock in a company and then sitting as a judge in a case that affects that company is unethical and is a conflict of interest ... his monetary interests. An honest judge would have removed himself from the case.
From the same report.
Other Gulf Coast judges have been honest.
Yes, I did read the report.
But the figure of $15,000 does not tell us enough to know whether this amount is material to his entire investment holdings.
Without knowing if the amount of the investment is material there is no knowing if there is a conflict of interest.
By your thinking owning one share of stock would be a conflict of interest.
I would agree with that.
One share is material interest. Didyou notice how many other companies he has investments in ... and you think he has no material interests.
Perhaps $15,000 is such a small amount to you, but I bet to most people $15,000 in one company would make them very interested in the health of the company.
He had material interest. Doing so makes his judgment suspect. He was unethical.