California's Oily Justices
Former employee Braxton Berkley was one of hundreds to sue Lockheed Martin and other chemical supply companies—some of which are among the world’s largest oil companies—for injuries resulting from exposure to toxic chemicals. Berkley, who says the injuries resulted from his work on military planes, appealed his case to the California Supreme Court. But the case was dismissed.
Why? Four out of seven justices held stock in some of those oil companies, and therefore couldn’t rule on the case.
This NYTimes editorial sums it up best:
It’s a crazy — and unacceptable — way to run a court. The justices should be required to put their financial holdings in a blind trust. Instead, California requires judges to follow their investments so they can recuse themselves in cases where there is a conflict.
Comments:
Posted 01/28/2008 06:56pm with
So, because these justices held stock in those companies, they recuse themselves and therefore the case is just dismissed? How convenient for those companies! What recourse does this poor person have then? The SCOTUS? Great, there’s another rigged court.
This case pretty much proves that the USA is being run by the big corporations, doesn’t it? Isn’t that called fascism?
Posted 01/28/2008 07:12pm with
From reading the AP account the remaining justices dismissed the case b/c they didn’t think it they had enough authority? Insanity. I’m certain there is a due process appeal…there’s no way this stands. Some organization needs to take this on.