AR-News: Hunters Dick Cheney and Justice Antonin Scalia hunt ducks -- ethics questioned

[jim robertson]

Legal ethics of Cheney, Scalia trip are raised

By David G. Savage
Los Angeles Times


JOHN GRESS / AP
Vice President Dick Cheney, left, and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia 
went hunting shortly after the court agreed to consider Cheney's 
energy-task-force case.


WASHINGTON — Vice President Dick Cheney and Supreme Court Justice Antonin 
Scalia went duck hunting together at a private camp in south Louisiana this 
month, only three weeks after the Supreme Court agreed to take up the vice 
president's appeal in lawsuits over his handling of the administration's 
energy task force.

While Scalia and Cheney are avid hunters and longtime friends, several 
experts in legal ethics questioned the timing of their trip and said it 
raised doubts about Scalia's ability to judge the case impartially.

But Scalia rejected that concern Friday, saying, "I do not think my 
impartiality could reasonably be questioned." Cheney's office referred 
questions about the propriety of the social encounters to the court.

Federal law says "any justice or judge shall disqualify himself in any 
proceeding in which his impartiality might be questioned." For nearly three 
years, Cheney has been fighting demands that he reveal whether he met with 
energy-industry officials, including then-Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay, when 
he was formulating President Bush's energy policy.

A lower court ruled Cheney must turn over documents detailing who met with 
his task force, but the Supreme Court announced Dec. 15 that it would hear 
his appeal. The justices are due to hear arguments in April.

In a written response to an inquiry from the Los Angeles Times about the 
hunting trip, Scalia said, "Cheney was indeed among the party of about nine 
who hunted from the camp. Social contacts with high-level executive 
officials (including Cabinet officers) have never been thought improper for 
judges who may have before them cases in which those people are involved in 
their official capacity, as opposed to their personal capacity. For example, 
Supreme Court justices are regularly invited to dine at the White House, 
whether or not a suit seeking to compel or prevent certain presidential 
action is pending."

Cheney and Bush are former energy-company executives, and the energy bill, 
which passed the House but stalled in the Senate, provides $21.5 billion in 
tax breaks for the energy industry.

The energy industry has contributed $4.7 million to Bush's two presidential 
campaigns, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a research 
group.

Cheney does not face a personal penalty in the pending lawsuits. He could 
not be forced to pay damages, for example.

But the plaintiffs — the Sierra Club and Judicial Watch — contend that 
Cheney and his staff members violated an open-government measure known as 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act by meeting behind closed doors with 
outside lobbyists for the oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries.

New York University law professor Stephen Gillers said Scalia should not 
have hunted with Cheney this year.

"A judge may have a friendship with a lawyer, and that's fine. But if the 
lawyer has a case before the judge, they don't socialize until it's over. 
That shows a proper respect for maintaining the public's confidence in the 
integrity of the process," said Gillers, an expert on legal ethics. "I think 
Justice Scalia should have been cognizant of that and avoided contact with 
the vice president until this was over. And this is not like a dinner with 
25 or 30 people. This is a hunting trip where you are together for a few 
days."

The pair arrived Jan. 5 on Gulfstream jets and were guests of Wallace 
Carline, the owner of Diamond Services, an oil-services company in Amelia, 
La.

"They asked us not to bring cameras out there," said Sheriff David Naquin, 
who serves St. Mary Parish, about 90 miles southwest of New Orleans.

While local police were told about Cheney's trip shortly before his arrival, 
they were told to keep it a secret, Naquin said.

"The justice had been here several times before. I'm kind of sorry Cheney 
picked that week because it was a poor shooting week," Naquin said. "There 
weren't many ducks here, which is unusual for this time of the year."

Scalia agreed with the assessment.

"The duck hunting was lousy. Our host said that in 35 years of duck hunting 
on this lease, he had never seen so few ducks," the justice said in his 
written response to the Times.

Northwestern University law professor Steven Lubet, who teaches judicial 
ethics, said he was not convinced Scalia must withdraw but that the trip 
raised questions.

"It's not clear this requires disqualification, but there are not separate 
rules for longtime friends," he said. "This is not like a lawyer going on a 
fishing trip with a judge. A lawyer is one step removed. Cheney is the 
litigant in this case. The question is whether the justice's hunting partner 
did something wrong. And the whole purpose of these rules is to ensure the 
appearance of impartiality in regard to the litigants before the court."

Details about the energy legislation and campaign contributions were 
provided by The Associated Press.




“The love for all living creatures is the most noble attribute of man.”    - 
Charles Darwin

_________________________________________________________________
Find high-speed ‘net deals — comparison-shop your local providers here. 
https://broadband.msn.com