Supreme Court's 'embarrassing' attempt to address major ethics issue astounds legal expert

[turbinetree]

By Matthew Chapman
Published February 17, 2026 5:39 PM ET

Legal expert Chris Geidner tore into the Supreme Court on his Law Dork blog for making an "embarrassing" roundabout ethics rule change that is meant to look like they're preventing conflicts of interest with individual stock ownership — while in fact allowing the two justices who trade individual stocks to keep doing so.

"Did the justices agree to divest from individual stock ownership — which would be the cleanest, most ethical, and easiest step, especially given that Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito are the only two justices who currently own individual stocks? Of course not," chided Geidner. "The Chief Justice of the United States will literally change the rules of the Supreme Court of the United States instead of divesting in individual stocks. Really."

This is a ludicrous move, wrote Geidner, and it's designed to work with a new piece of software for the court to make "automated recusal checks."

https://www.rawstory.com/supreme-court-2675278172/

Hey Roberts since you gave the orange traitor immunity along with the 5 other maga jerks...............I have a idea resign...........you are trying to do this.............

[Whyisthisstillclose]

1. Psychopaths have no shame and cannot be embarrassed

We need a complete reevaluation of how we are populating these lifetime positions. Partisan politics has poisoned this court to the point of absurdity.

[turbinetree]

2. The corruption is so widespread that I cannot wait until November gets here.........

we are slowly moving down the path of being like Hungary...........

[struggle4progress]

3. Many of those shizzwits long ago failed the "good behavior" standard