{"id":2100504,"date":"2023-11-16T07:38:01","date_gmt":"2023-11-16T12:38:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/nomination-of-justice-jacksons-husband-to-judicial-commission-prompts-ethics-concerns-lawyer\/"},"modified":"2023-11-16T07:43:43","modified_gmt":"2023-11-16T12:43:43","slug":"nomination-of-justice-jacksons-husband-to-judicial-commission-prompts-ethics-concerns-lawyer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/nomination-of-justice-jacksons-husband-to-judicial-commission-prompts-ethics-concerns-lawyer\/","title":{"rendered":"Nomination of Justice Jackson&#8217;s husband to judicial commission prompts ethics concerns: Lawyer"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">24<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fnomination-of-justice-jacksons-husband-to-judicial-commission-prompts-ethics-concerns-lawyer%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2100504&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><h2>Supreme Court Justice&#8217;s Husband\u2064 Nominated to Commission with Power to Remove Judges<\/h2>\n<h3>Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown \u2062Jackson&#8217;s husband has been nominated to a commission in \u200bWashington, D.C., which has\u200b the power to remove judges in the \u2062district, prompting questions by a former Trump \u2064administration attorney about whether any conflicts of interest could \u200barise.<\/h3>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Jackson&#8217;s husband, Dr. Patrick Jackson, has been practicing as a\u2062 gastrointestinal surgeon at \u2063Georgetown University \u2064Hospital \u2062for the past 20 years and has\u200d been the chief\u2062 of\u2063 general surgery at the hospital for the past nine years. But just\u200c under two\u200d years since President \u200cJoe Biden\u200b nominated his wife\u200d to the \u2064highest court, he was quietly nominated \u2062to the Washington, D.C., Judicial\u200d Disabilities and Tenure Commission, or CJDT, a role that would\u2064 give him &#8220;authority&#8221; to remove judges in response to \u2064complaints.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>&#8220;CJDT has\u2062 the authority to remove a judge for willful misconduct in office, for willful and persistent failure to perform judicial duties, and for conduct \u200dprejudicial to\u2064 the administration of \u2064justice, or which brings the judicial \u2064office into disrepute,&#8221; according to \u2064the commission&#8217;s webpage. The \u200dfull D.C.\u2063 Council\u200d is scheduled\u2062 to\u200c vote on Patrick Jackson&#8217;s nomination on Nov. 21.<\/p>\n<p>Phil Mendelson, a Democratic councilman for the D.C. Council, nominated Patrick Jackson in\u2064 part\u200d because of his wide\u2064 background in medical \u2063science, a \u200dskill set that is \u2063recommended for a role that involves\u2062 assessing judicial fitness. A 15-page proposal by\u200b Mendelson includes Patrick\u2062 Jackson&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/how-yellowstone-creator-taylor-sheridan-shook-the-pillars-of-the-tv-industry\/\" title=\"How \u201cYellowstone\u201d Creator Taylor Sheridan Shook the Pillars of the TV Industry\">resume dating back<\/a> to his first years \u2063at Columbia University&#8217;s medical \u2063program from 1991-1995.<\/p>\n<p>The commission \u200balso has the\u2064 authority \u2064to suspend or retire a \u2062judge involuntarily if its members determine that \u2064the\u200c judge suffers \u200dfrom a\u200c mental or \u200bphysical disability\u2063 that prevents or &#8220;seriously interferes&#8221; with the\u2063 performance\u2062 of duties, according to the \u200dCJDT&#8217;s\u200d webpage.<\/p>\n<p>That could, in theory, give Patrick Jackson the \u200bopportunity to have significant influence over\u200c the\u200d fate of judges whose work may come \u2064before his wife on\u2062 the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<p>Patrick Jackson&#8217;s appointment\u2062 to \u200dthe\u200d commission by a member of the D.C. Council could therefore put him in a\u200d position to encounter potential ethical dilemmas,\u200d according to Mark\u200d Paoletta, a \u2062former Trump administration lawyer who also works as counsel\u2062 to Clarence Thomas&#8217;s \u2063wife, Ginni.<\/p>\n<p>Paoletta \u200calso pointed out a separate issue involving \u200bKetanji \u200cBrown Jackson&#8217;s 2022 disclosure form, which revealed \u2063that her husband received\u200c fees for &#8220;consulting on medical malpractice\u200d cases.\u201d The disclosure did not specify \u2062which\u200b years Patrick Jackson \u200dreceived the \u2063payments, which is required by law.<\/p>\n<p>There is also\u2063 no mention of Patrick Jackson\u2063 receiving payments \u2063to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/nomination-of-justice-jacksons-husband-to-judicial-commission-prompts-ethics-concerns-lawyer\/\" title=\"Nomination of Justice Jackson's husband to judicial commission prompts ethics concerns: Lawyer\">provide\u200b expert witness testimony<\/a> or \u2062consulting on malpractice cases in Mendelson&#8217;s proposal, nor\u200b did the payments come up during Patrick Jackson&#8217;s Nov. 1 interview with the D.C. \u200dPublic Oversight Roundtable, which interviews nominees ahead of their confirmation \u200cvote.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;But it\u2019s easy to \u200cimagine \u2062that [Patrick Jackson] could provide expert witness testimony or consult\u2064 on a medical \u2062malpractice case for a\u200c law firm\/company (that pays \u2064him)\u200c and that firm \u2064is \u200bin fact before\u2063 a judge who may be (or will be)\u200b in front\u200c of the commission he\u200d sits on,&#8221; \u200dPaoletta\u200b said, highlighting another potential ethical dilemma underlying Patrick Jackson&#8217;s appointment.<\/p>\n<p>Paoletta,\u200b a\u2063 staunch defender of Thomas in the wake of \u200cProPublica&#8217;s reports about the justice&#8217;s alleged ethical improprieties, maintains that spouses of justices\u2063 should be \u2064able to have their own careers free from undue\u200b scrutiny.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;I&#8217;ve advocated that Justices\u2019 spouses should\u2063 be able to have separate \u200ccareers, w\/ rules \u2062of recusal,&#8221; Paoletta wrote on social media.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;If this were Ginni Thomas, Jesse Barrett, Jane Roberts, media &#8230; would have already been investigating possible conflicts of interest. Or how and why this nomination occurred, and so shortly after [his] spouse was appointed to the Supreme \u2062Court,&#8221;\u2062 Paoletta added.<\/p>\n<p>Patrick Jackson vowed\u200d during his interview on Nov. 1 to\u2062 recuse himself if any \u2063conflict arose should he be confirmed \u200dfor the role.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI can\u2019t think of a conflict I would have in this process,&#8221;\u2064 he said during the \u2063interview.\u2063 &#8220;Not being a\u2062 lawyer, \u2064I would never have a firm that would be \u200drepresented in front of a judge\u200c that was being\u2062 discussed in front of the commission.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Patrick Jackson&#8217;s nomination to\u200b the CJDT even \u200draised concern among progressive commentators on social media, including court watcher Noah Dahl, who is often critical of the Republican-appointed justices&#8217; conduct. Dahl\u2062 admitted Ketanji Brown Jackson could be &#8220;wading\u2064 into an\u200b ethical quagmire&#8221; if the D.C. Council confirms her husband\u2064 to the \u2063commission.<\/p>\n<p>Spouses of Supreme Court conservative justices have been the subject \u200bof \u2062extensive media\u2063 scrutiny, coinciding with an increasing focus by liberal-leaning watchdogs and\u2063 Democratic lawmakers \u2062on\u200c <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/local-sheriff-ousts-incumbent-republican-in-mississippi-us-house-primary-runoff\/\" title=\"Local Sheriff Ousts Incumbent Republican in Mississippi US House Primary Runoff\">alleged ethical lapses<\/a> among conservative \u2063justices. A\u200c September 2022 report by Politico, for example, highlighted that Justice Amy Coney Barrett \u200bwithheld information about her attorney husband, Jesse Barrett,\u200d such as his list\u200c of clients, making it difficult to \u2062see whether any of his clients have business before the high court.<\/p>\n<p>Thomas also faced calls from progressive lawmakers, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez \u2064(D-NY), to\u2064 resign from the high \u2064court over the fact that he didn&#8217;t recuse himself from \u2064some \u200dcases involving former\u2064 President Donald \u2064Trump after revelations that his wife urged \u2064then-White House chief of staff\u2063 Mark Meadows \u200bto \u2062continue challenging the 2020 election.<\/p>\n<p>Cassandra Burke Robertson, Case Western Reserve University \u200dLaw School professor, told the\u200c Washington Examiner she was less convinced that Patrick Jackson&#8217;s nomination raises any direct\u2064 ethical concerns because &#8220;one person\u200c isn&#8217;t making the decision about suspending a judge or taking other steps.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;I think it probably is a little \u2063bit of whataboutism, which I&#8217;m somewhat sympathetic to \u2062because I think that a lot of people do criticize the work of justices&#8217; spouses, depending on whether or not it&#8217;s a \u2062justice that \u2064they agree\u200c with ideologically,&#8221; Robertson \u200bsaid.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court\u200d on Monday announced it would adopt \u200ban ethics code after years of behind-the-scenes planning on how to adopt new guidelines and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/gov-cuomo-blames-health-care-workers-for-nursing-home-deaths\/\" title=\"Gov. Cuomo blames health care workers for nursing home deaths\">amid growing calls<\/a> for \u2063ethical oversight. The\u200d justices have long maintained that \u200cthey\u200c consult the same code of conduct\u2064 for <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/government-unions-have-been-stealing-money-for-years-now-scotus-has-the-chance-to-intervene\/\" title=\"Government Unions Have Been Stealing Money For Years \u2014 Now, SCOTUS Has The Chance To Intervene\">lower court judges<\/a>, and they \u2062said this\u2063 week that the new code of ethics would help address any &#8220;misunderstanding&#8221; by the public \u200dover their ethical obligations.<\/p>\n<p>There\u2062 have been no indications that the justices allowed their decisions to \u2062be compromised by outside\u200c forces or attempts to sway their rulings.<\/p>\n<p>While several Democrats in Congress criticized the new code \u2062of\u2062 ethics \u200cfor lacking \u200bany enforcement mechanism, a justice can be \u2063impeached\u2063 by a simple\u2063 majority \u2063vote \u2063in the House and can be convicted by a two-thirds \u200cvote in the Senate.<\/p>\n<p> <\/p>\n<h2> What steps should be taken to avoid any appearance of impropriety or\u2063 conflicts of interest in the nomination of spouses of Supreme Court\u200d justices to positions of power<\/h2>\n<p><span>  Has faced scrutiny for her husband&#8217;s involvement\u2063 in a school that has \u200banti-LGBTQ+ policies.<\/p>\n<p>While it is important to recognize that spouses of Supreme Court justices should have their own careers and be free from undue \u2064scrutiny, it is \u2063equally important to ensure transparency and address any potential conflicts of interest. The nomination of Patrick Jackson \u2064to the CJDT raises valid\u2062 concerns about possible conflicts with his wife&#8217;s role as a Supreme Court justice.<\/p>\n<p>The CJDT is a commission with the authority to remove judges, making it a powerful entity that could directly\u2064 impact the work of judges, including Supreme Court Justices. Given Patrick Jackson&#8217;s medical background, it is understandable that he was nominated for \u2064his expertise \u2064in assessing judicial fitness. However, his appointment to \u2063this commission while his wife\u2063 serves on the \u2063Supreme Court\u200b raises \u2063questions about potential conflicts and ethical dilemmas.<\/p>\n<p>Mark Paoletta, a former \u200dTrump administration\u200c lawyer, \u2064pointed out the issue of Ketanji Brown Jackson&#8217;s husband receiving fees for consulting on medical malpractice cases. The lack of clarity regarding the specific\u2063 years \u2064when these \u2063payments took place raises concerns about potential\u200d conflicts of \u2063interest and compliance\u200c with legal requirements. Additionally, there is no mention of these payments in Patrick Jackson&#8217;s nomination proposal or during his interview with the D.C. Public Oversight Roundtable.<\/p>\n<p>Paoletta\u200b rightly brings attention to the fact that if the situation were reversed, with the spouse of a conservative justice nominated to a commission, \u2062media outlets would likely be investigating possible conflicts of interest. The potential ethical dilemmas surrounding Patrick Jackson&#8217;s appointment should not be overlooked or dismissed.<\/p>\n<p>It is essential \u2062to approach this issue \u2064with fairness, transparency, and a commitment\u2064 to maintaining the integrity of the judicial system. If Patrick Jackson\u200b is confirmed \u2064for the role, it will be crucial for him to uphold his vow to recuse himself in case of conflicts and\u2064 to navigate\u2062 the commission&#8217;s work with utmost professionalism and ethical responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the nomination of spouses\u200c of Supreme Court\u200b justices to commissions and\u2062 other positions of power should be carefully\u200c considered\u200b to avoid any appearance of impropriety or conflicts of interest. While it is important to respect the independence and careers \u2063of justices&#8217; spouses,\u200b it is equally important\u200d to maintain public trust in the judicial system and\u2062 ensure the absence of any undue influence.<\/p>\n<p>The scrutiny\u200d faced by spouses of conservative justices highlights the need for consistent and unbiased examination of potential conflicts of interest across\u2064 the political \u2062spectrum. Only through\u2064 comprehensive scrutiny and adherence to \u200dethical standards can we preserve the integrity and impartiality of our \u200cjudicial system.<\/p>\n<p>Overall, the nomination of Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson&#8217;s\u200c husband to the CJDT warrants thoughtful consideration and\u200d examination of potential conflicts of interest. Transparency, ethical responsibility, and<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson&#8217;s husband has been nominated to a commission in Washington, D.C., which has the power to remove judges in the district, prompting questions by a former Trump administration attorney about whether any conflicts of interest could arise. Jackson&#8217;s husband, Dr. Patrick Jackson, has been practicing as a gastrointestinal surgeon at<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2100505,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[538],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2100504","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-washington-examiner"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2100504","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2100504"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2100504\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2100505"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2100504"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2100504"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2100504"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}