• moistclump@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s not even a suggestion. It’s an appeasement hoping it gets people off their back and looking the other way. I’d be very, very surprised if they actually believed in this and felt it suggested better behaviour, considering it’s being implemented after they got caught.

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        A kindly, quiet, soft-spoken suggestion.

        We need a DOJ probe into wide-spread bribery in the court already. Charges should be filed wherever appropriate.

  • alienanimals@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    “Undisclosed gifts”

    Calling them gifts makes it seem like someone got a pair of socks. Clarence Thomas was given 38 vacations, 26 private jet flights, and a hell of a lot more from multiple different billionaires. These are bribes that are bigger in value than most American’s yearly salaries.

  • SeaJ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 years ago

    There is no enforcement mechanism. This is an ethics suggestion, not a code. Ridiculous.

  • BluJay320@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I can already hear Barbossa

    “the code is more what you’d call ‘guidelines’ than actual rules.”

  • Synthead@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 years ago

    Name a time a politician has been given a “gift” worth mentioning without an ulterior motive.

    There is no such thing as “gifts” in politics. They’re bribes.

  • garretble@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    Let me guess which ones have already figured out ways to skirt whatever new rules they are proposing.

    • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      No need to “skirt” the code. It has no teeth at all. They can violate it all they want without any accountability.

    • ZeroCool@feddit.chOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Breaking: Clarence Thomas rules November 13th constitutionally guaranteed ‘Opposite Day’ according to review of the *mumble* amendment.

  • radix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I only had time to skim the rules for now, so I hope I’m wrong, but there doesn’t appear to be any mention of 3rd party oversight or punishment for breaking these rules. If so, it’s basically a pinkie promise by the wolves to stop getting into the henhouse, and they’ll definitely self-report if they do.