Big Money and Judges

MANIFESTO

Yesterday's SCOTUS decision seems to me to be a no-brainer given the unbelievable nature of the case.

In a 5-4 vote, the court decided that West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Brent Benjamin deprived Harman Mining Co. of the right to a fair trial because he participated in a case involving a major contributor to his campaign.

Harman executives had complained that there was the appearance of bias because the chief executive officer of Massey Energy Co. contributed $3 million to Benjamin's election campaign at the same time Massey was appealing a multimillion-dollar jury verdict — now totaling $82.7 million — against Harman.

Benjamin refused to recuse himself and voted with the 3-2 majority to overturn the verdict. Harman appealed to the Supreme Court.

I have two questions.

First, how in the name of common sense could four judges side with the defendant in this case? Antonin (Screw 'em All) Scalia went out of his way to decry how the decision will erode "public confidence in the nation's judicial system." This from a man who had no trouble in siding with the majority in the hideous Bush v. Gore case and refused to recuse himself from deciding a 2004 case involving Vice President Dick Cheney and his energy policy task force after having gone duck hunting with Cheney in Louisiana shortly after the court agreed to hear his case.

Second, when will a decision like this affect the legislative branch of government?

UPDATE — I forgot to say that I think electing judges is an absolutely terrible idea.