BREAKING: HELL YES! Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan terrifies her MAGA "co-workers" by boldly calling for a binding ethics panel to finally hold the court accountable — while Amy Coney Barrett was sitting right beside her.

Thomas and Alito just started sweating bullets...

“I think that we would be better off with an enforcement mechanism, and I think, you know, that’s not to say I think that my colleagues aren’t taking this code incredibly seriously,” Kagan said while testifying before Congress.

“We’re all, you know, making every effort, and I think successful efforts to live by it. But if nothing else, for public confidence, right?” she added. “An enforcement mechanism can also make clear that not every accusation, every charge, has anything to it.”

This is a firm but overly diplomatic assessment from Kagan. The liberal justices certainly take the code of conduct seriously — as evinced by the fact that none of them have been caught in corruption scandals — but the conservative justices aren't nearly as committed to ethical behavior.

Both Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito have been caught accepting in-kind bribes from powerful Republican billionaires in the form of luxury travel, gifts, and expensive vacations. They're living like sultans, destroying any semblance of propriety and undermining the legitimacy of the court in the process. Just based on what we know already, both of them should have been impeached and removed long ago.

"You know, on the Code of Conduct, as you noted, we, the nine justices all agreed to a Code of Conduct," Kagan said. "It's specifically geared towards the Supreme Court. As you also noted, there is a question about enforceability..."

"And right now, the mechanism has no enforceability system," she explained. "And this is something on which various people have spoken in the past. And, you know, I've made my views known in the past, which is that I think we should work hard to try to figure out some enforcement system."

"I will say that that's an extremely difficult question for a pretty obvious reason, I think, which is that I don't think that you would want an enforcement system that was controlled by the executive branch or by the legislature," Kagan went on.

"And this is because of what you said in your opening statement about the importance of judicial independence," she said. "You know, you don't want a president picking an inspector general to decide, you know, which of us is breaking the rules or how we're breaking the rules."

This is an astute point from Kagan. While we absolutely need an ethics panel to keep watch over the court, it cannot be controlled by the White House. Imagine if Trump had an ethics attack dog that he could sic on the liberal justices to lay the groundwork for impeaching them on fabricated charges. He has already displayed a horrifying willingness to politicize the Justice Department and FBI for partisan purposes. We simply cannot trust him or future Republican Presidents with direct, enforceable oversight over the Supreme Court.

"So, I think it really has to come from within the judiciary," Kagan continued. "And that's hard because, you know, we sit at the top of the Judiciary Committee. So, it's hard to figure out how to have a system that makes use of judicial resources to police us."

"One idea that has been suggested by some people is to use respected retired judges. That has, you know, some pros, some cons. I think that this remains an open question, a question of discussion," she said.

Meanwhile, conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett was sitting beside Kagan during the hearing. She was visibly uncomfortable with the line of questioning, presumably because she didn't want to throw her idealogical compatriots under the bus, and so she stated that she's "not quite sure" and "less certain" about Kagan's suggestions.

What do you think the best course of actions is?

Please like and share if you support an independent ethics panel!

See less