Comments on: Links on Perry Homes http://www.scotxblog.com/news-and-links/links-on-perry-homes/ Legal Issues Before the Texas Supreme Court Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:38:30 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Don Cruse http://www.scotxblog.com/news-and-links/links-on-perry-homes/comment-page-1/#comment-341 Don Cruse Mon, 05 May 2008 13:06:19 +0000 http://www.scotxblog.com/?p=176#comment-341 <p>I agree, and I think the best solution is out of the Court's control. That would be an appointment system that took out campaigns. By requiring Justices to run statewide campaigns, the current system asks them to somehow pay for those campaigns.</p> <p>Recusals might work well in many cases. If a single Justice has accepted sizable contributions and decides to recuse, that does address the problem of public perception. But when the entire Court is in the same situation, recusals may not really help. In part, that's because of how interim justices are chosen. In <em>Perry Homes</em>, for example, mass recusals would have forced the governor (who has personally received more contributions than the entire Court) to select interim justices to hear this case. I'm sure each interim justice would have endeavored to decide the case fairly, but the press narrative about campaign cash would have been the same.</p> I agree, and I think the best solution is out of the Court’s control. That would be an appointment system that took out campaigns. By requiring Justices to run statewide campaigns, the current system asks them to somehow pay for those campaigns.

Recusals might work well in many cases. If a single Justice has accepted sizable contributions and decides to recuse, that does address the problem of public perception. But when the entire Court is in the same situation, recusals may not really help. In part, that’s because of how interim justices are chosen. In Perry Homes, for example, mass recusals would have forced the governor (who has personally received more contributions than the entire Court) to select interim justices to hear this case. I’m sure each interim justice would have endeavored to decide the case fairly, but the press narrative about campaign cash would have been the same.

]]> By: UTLaw71 http://www.scotxblog.com/news-and-links/links-on-perry-homes/comment-page-1/#comment-340 UTLaw71 Sat, 03 May 2008 16:45:45 +0000 http://www.scotxblog.com/?p=176#comment-340 <p>The issue here is the appearance of bias. Perhaps justice was done in Perry Homes, but the Supreme Court's reputation has taken a horrible hit because of its willingness to hear a case in which one of the parties contributed large sums to each of the justices. They desparately need to review their guidelines for both accepting contributions and for recusals. Their current laissez faire approach destroys the Court's credibility.</p> The issue here is the appearance of bias. Perhaps justice was done in Perry Homes, but the Supreme Court’s reputation has taken a horrible hit because of its willingness to hear a case in which one of the parties contributed large sums to each of the justices. They desparately need to review their guidelines for both accepting contributions and for recusals. Their current laissez faire approach destroys the Court’s credibility.

]]>