(US) Supreme Court says (WV Supreme Court Justice) Benjamin should have recused himself

[Lasher]

June 8, 2009
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Brent Benjamin should have stepped aside from a case involving the man who spent more than $3 million to put Benjamin on the court.

In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that Benjamin violated constitutional due process rights when he refused, on two different occasions, to step down from hearing Massey Energy's appeal of a multimillion-dollar Boone County jury verdict.

Benjamin cast deciding votes in two 3-2 decisions, in November 2007 and April 2008, to overturn the verdict against Massey and in favor of Hugh Caperton and his company Harman Mining. With interest, the verdict is now worth more than $82 million.

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed those decisions and sent the case back to the West Virginia Supreme Court "for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion." The justices said the case should be reheard after Benjamin recuses himself.

This is the first time the high court has ruled that judges elected to state courts can be required to step down from hearing cases if one party made major contributions to their election campaigns.

http://sundaygazettemail.com/News/200906080172

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/09/AR2009060902726.html

This is a great victory. I can't believe I missed it when it first came out.

[quidam56]

1. Remember hearing something about this a while ago,

nice to know the outcome.

END MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL !!! http://www.wisecountyissues.com/?p=138

[strategery blunder]

2. Good. Hopefully this decision is the first step to a clean judiciary.

If a campaign contributor can't buy a justice's rulings, what's the point of contributing to the campaign? Campaign contributions for judges/justices is an issue in many states, including where I live in Washington, where justices are elected, and such contributions directly undermine confidence in the impartiality of the courts. This is one SCOTUS opinion I've gotta find and read. :popcorn:

Why am I not surprised that the decision was 5-4? It should've been 9-0, or 7-2 at the worst (accounting for Thomas and Scalia).

[rpannier]

5. Bet with very little thought you could figure out who the other dissenters were nt

[Zerne]

3. Glad to know

Just joined DU and am exploring. Glad I found this. I heard about it on NPR before but I guess I've been living in a bubble over the summer and I hadn't heard about the outcome till now.

[rpannier]

4. The diseenters were...

Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Scalia's sock puppet.

SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE!