Scalia and Thomas Dine with Health Care Law Supporters

The Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune ran a story by James Oliphant yesterday suggesting that it was improper for Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas to speak at the annual dinner of the Federalist Society because among the dinner’s sponsors were law firms representing those who are challenging the constitutionality of the health care reform law. The story began:

The day the Supreme Court gathered behind closed doors to consider the politically divisive question of whether it would hear a challenge to President Obama’s healthcare law, two of its justices, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, were feted at a dinner sponsored by the law firm that will argue the case before the high court.

Later on the story noted this did not violate any applicable ethics rules, but raised concerns nonetheless.

the sheer proximity of Scalia and Thomas to two of the law firms in the case, as well as to a company with a massive financial interest, was enough to alarm ethics-in-government activists.

In case there was any question about the significance of the story, the LAT headline read: “Scalia and Thomas dine with healthcare law challengers as court takes case.”  Yet the headline could just has easily have read “Scalia and Thomas dine with healthcare law supporters,” because among the dinner’s sponsors were law firms (such as Mayer Brown and O’Melveny & Myers) that are representing parties who are supporting the health care law and filed briefs in the very same case. This should not be a surprise as the Federalist Society’s annual dinner is a rather large affair with over two-dozen law firm sponsors that represent clients on all sides of all sorts of matters — much like the annual dinners sponsored by other prominent legal groups. But if the papers had reported that, then there would not have been much of a story.

Jonathan H. Adler — Jonathan H. Adler teaches courses in environmental, administrative, and constitutional law at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More
Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More
U.S.

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More