It would appear that the “Wise Latina” is full of wisdom about more than just constitutional law. She’s also pretty savvy when it comes to marketing and promotions, specifically of her own books.
We’ve been hearing all sorts of rumors, innuendo, and threats from Democrats and the liberal legacy media about some sort of “ethics problem” on the Supreme Court and the need to either “rein them in” or pack the court or whatever. Almost all of those complaints seem to focus on either Clarence Thomas or Neil Gorsuch. But most of the people doing the complaining don’t have much to say thus far about the other justices. Perhaps they might want to take a look at this story about Justice Sonia Sotomayor and her staff. After her 2019 book “Just Ask” was published and she was touring the country speaking about it, her staff reportedly pressured a public library to purchase more copies of the book than they had ordered. Are there any ethics-related questions about that? (Business Insider)
Sonia Sotomayor isn’t just a Supreme Court justice — she’s also a bestselling author.
And according to a new investigation by the Associated Press, those two facets of Sotomayor’s life have at times intertwined, raising questions about the current ethics practices of the high court.
The report found that taxpayer-funded staff at the Supreme Court have often pressured public institutions, including colleges and libraries, to purchase more of Sotomayor’s books for events around the country where the liberal justice has been invited to speak.
Right up front, allow me to say that I remain a capitalist and people have the right to profit from their creative efforts. That includes Supreme Court Justices. Everyone needs to make a living. And boosting your book sales falls in line with such an idea.
But the details of this particular interaction do raise some questions, perhaps even questions of ethics. Offering to speak at a public library in Oregon is neither surprising nor unusual. Authors speak at bookstores and libraries all the time. But the library in question ordered 250 copies of Sotomayor’s book. Her staff wrote to the library staff and said that 250 copies was “definitely not enough.” That’s something of a red flag because pushing them to increase the order immediately translates to more money for the Justice and her publisher. Shouldn’t the hosting venue be able to make that decision?
Then there’s the reason they gave for the number. They were anticipating 1,000 people to be in attendance. And having a copy of the book was a requirement to attend. In other words, the price of admission to even be allowed to listen to a Supreme Court Justice speak about the topic of her book was to buy a book. She’s a public servant. If she’s willing to address the public, shouldn’t everyone who is able to attend be able to hear her?
Again, this doesn’t sound like it would be in any way illegal. But was it ethical? Given the smattering of things that have been hurled at the more conservative justices, it seems as if this is a question that merits an answer if only in the interest of equal treatment.
The story doesn’t end there, however. The University of Hawaii law school has been running a program for quite a while where Supreme Court justices are invited to come to teach a class at their school when the court is not in session. They can be paid up to $30,000 for these guest teaching gigs, but the perks don’t end there. The school pays for their 1st class airfare each way, their luxury hotel rooms, and other accommodations while on the island. They are given great “flexibility” in the starting time for their classes and how much time they need to spend there. Arrangements are made for free trips to destinations around the islands for sightseeing.
It’s obviously a pretty sweet deal. And as the linked article notes, some of these guest teaching assignment costs are subsidized by donors to the university who are not named. That raises other possible ethical questions. And which of the current and former SCOTUS justices have taken advantage of this offer? It’s quite a list. It includes Ginsburg, Kennedy, Alito, Breyer, Scalia, and one more name you might recognize. Sonia Sotomayor.
So before the indignant hordes in the legacy media get too caught up focusing all of their suspicions on Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, perhaps they should consider casting their net a bit wider. If you want to set the bar a lot higher for the court, there are plenty of questionable activities taking place.
Read the full article here