More from our inbox:

To the Editor:

Re “The Highest Court Has the Government’s Lowest Ethical Standards” (editorial, April 16):

Kudos to the editorial board for advocating judicial ethics reform. It’s astonishing that the highest court in the land has almost no ethics guidelines.

Justice Clarence Thomas did not report his “gifts.” However, the real blame goes to Chief Justice John Roberts and the other justices for not demanding and implementing a code of ethics.

With the reputation of the court dwindling every day and citizens questioning the integrity of the justices, it’s time for Congress to do what is obviously the right thing and pass judicial ethics reform that includes all levels of the United States judicial system.

I urge everyone to support Senator Sheldon Whitehouse’s efforts.

Kenneth Olshansky
San Rafael, Calif.

To the Editor:

Any assessment of the Supreme Court’s place in the United States’ system of government must distinguish between its power and its authority.

The Supreme Court has no power. It has no way of enforcing its decisions. Andrew Jackson may not have actually said “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it,” but the point is valid.

The authority of the Supreme Court rests on the willingness of other branches of government and the citizens to accept and abide by its decisions. The court’s power derives from its authority.

Whatever authority the Supreme Court has depends on its reputation for impartiality and integrity. What the current justices seem not to realize is that by their blatantly partisan decisions and corruption, they are on the verge of losing what little authority the court still has, and thus, also, its power.

William Archer Brown
Gaithersburg, Md.

To the Editor:

I harbor no ill will toward justices who deserve to travel in luxury. But if the justification for accepting these lavish gifts is that their income to afford these trips would be much higher if not for their sacrifice in public service, I have an easy solution: Retire from the court earlier, earn the money you are capable of earning, and enjoy your golden years. Earlier retirement would be one small step toward fixing a broken court.

Noah Lichtman
New York

To the Editor:

The recent disclosure that Justice Clarence Thomas accepted expensive travel without disclosing it, and the reports that several other current and former justices have done so too, has led to demands that justices, like other federal government officials, be required to disclose more than de minimis gifts.

It ought to be clear, however, that disclosure of such gifts is inadequate. What is required is an outright ban on all government employees’ acceptance of any gifts from anyone (except close family members).

Research indicates that even nominal gifts unconsciously influence behavior. For example, nominal gifts — pens, notepads, mugs — given to physicians by pharmaceutical company representatives resulted in those doctors prescribing more drugs and more expensive drugs.

There is no reason to believe that high-minded judges (or other government officials) are immune to such unconscious influences.

Alan Meisel
Pittsburgh
The writer is emeritus professor of law and bioethics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

To the Editor:

Re “Thomas Failed to Disclose Real Estate Deal With Conservative Texas Billionaire” (news article, April 14):

The federal tax return deadline just passed. Just wondering if Clarence Thomas’s “I didn’t feel like it” response to his nondisclosure of gifts and newly exposed real estate transaction obligations will work for me in my dealings with the I.R.S.

He’s a Supreme Court justice with three decades of experience. Shouldn’t I view him as a role model and emulate his behavior?

Jim Meehan
Lake Worth, Fla.

To the Editor:

Re “Not Just Another Billionaire,” by Jamelle Bouie (column, April 16):

Mr. Bouie’s association of Harlan Crow’s collection of Nazi artifacts with Justice Clarence Thomas and the country’s conservatives is a clumsy political hit job.

Let’s begin with the facts: Mr. Crow’s collection is about history in all of its horror and glory, nothing more and nothing less. The same rooms housing the artifacts and busts of tyrants are also populated by memorabilia from countless other figures — Churchill, Grant, Patton, to name but a very few — who bent the arc of history in a direction that defeated the very evildoers on whom Mr. Bouie chooses to focus.

And what, in any case, does Mr. Crow’s decision to include Nazi artifacts in his collection have to do with Justice Thomas and conservatives? Absolutely nothing.

Luke L. Dauchot
Palos Verdes Estates, Calif.

Ageism and Biden

To the Editor:

As a woman in her mid-80s, who “still has all of her marbles,” I find the lack of confidence in President Biden’s mental acumen in the years ahead unfair and highly insulting.

At my age, I may forget a name (the proper nouns are the first to go!) and my gait may be slower, but give me a task and I’ll attack it with diligence and good common sense. As a retired lawyer, I can still win arguments, and I have the wisdom of empathy and perspective that comes with age.

If you have experienced great joy and great sorrow and if you remember clearly what is ancient history to much younger cohorts, you definitely have the advantage over those who are junior to you.

When and if Mr. Biden finishes a second term, he would be 86. I say, “Go for it, Joe!”

Ellen Shaffer Meyer
Wilmington, Del.

Financial Whistle-Blowers

To the Editor:

“Announcing the End of Faking It in Silicon Valley” (Sunday Business, April 16) misses an important reason it has become harder for start-ups to get away with making fraudulent financial claims. Whistle-blowers are speaking up to the Securities and Exchange Commission more than ever.

Since the whistle-blower program was established in 2010, thousands of whistle-blowers have reported concerns to the S.E.C. Last fiscal year alone, the agency received over 12,300 whistle-blower tips, a more than 300 percent increase since the program’s inception.

With the offer of financial incentives for information that leads to successful enforcement actions, the S.E.C.’s whistle-blower program will play an increasingly critical role in the agency’s efforts to protect investors and the marketplace.

Erika Kelton
Washington
The writer is a whistle-blower attorney.

When a Health Treatment Is ‘Too Good to Be True’

To the Editor:

Re “A Beauty Treatment Promised to Zap Fat. It Left Some Disfigured” (front page, April 16):

Your story about the side effects of using the CoolSculpting fat-reduction device is terribly sad, especially for those who have suffered painful and debilitating side effects.

But the story says so much more about people, particularly Americans today. It speaks to the conviction of many that their body “falls short” of an ideal in some way — so much so that they are willing to try remedies that, if they stopped to think about them, are too easy and miraculous to be likely to work.

And that’s the most telling point of all: As a society we have not educated people to take information and assess whether it is likely to be true — and not believe in something that’s “too good to be true.”

Barbara Gold
Philadelphia
The writer is a pediatrician.

Source: Read Full Article