The Gavel outside the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio. (Photo by Graham Stokes for Ohio Capital Journal. Republish photo only with original article.)
It’s the tale of two courts with ethically challenged Supremes adjudicating cases they have no business adjudicating. Obviously compromised justices on the Ohio Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court — with glaring conflicts of interest on issues before the courts that scream for recusal — playact as neutral arbiters of the law they place themselves above.
Ohio Supreme Court Justice Joe Deters and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas do not belong anywhere near two cases taken up by their respective institutions. Deters should not be judging a case on appeal that he once argued before a lower court and Thomas should not be weighing in on a ballot issue involving an insurrectionist aided and abetted by his wife. Certainly their “impartiality might be reasonably questioned” in those matters and has been to no avail.
In both the state and federal court, Deters and Thomas have simply ignored their clear legal obligation “to not hear or decide matters” whenever reasonable doubt is raised about suspected biases (perceived or real) coloring judgement. In doing so, both justices have made a mockery of the rule of law in their separate courts and further eroded public trust in a judiciary that flaunts its prejudice from the bench.