EDITORIAL
Supreme Court needs more ethics scrutiny

As a rule, U.S. Supreme Court justices police themselves. They decide if they have conflicts of interest, and those decisions are final.

That leaves us, the public, having to trust that they're not acting out of arrogance or self-interest. Not an easy task.

For example, when Justice Antonin Scalia took a duck-hunting trip with Vice President Dick Cheney on an oil-services entrepreneur's land in Louisiana last January, the Sierra Club raised some valid concerns.

The trip came shortly after the high court agreed to hear Cheney's appeal against a federal court order to release records on his work on a national energy strategy that may have been influenced by former Enron chairman Ken Lay and other energy industry executives and lobbyists.

Scalia, who says he did not discuss the issue with Cheney on the trip, did not recuse himself from the case. Regardless of what they talked about, we're uncomfortable with cozy judicial-executive relationships. Even the suggestion of bias should compel a judge to disqualify himself from a case.

In light of this debate, we're encouraged that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has ordered a study of federal judicial ethics. A six-member committee will evaluate how the federal judicial system is dealing with judicial misbehavior and disability.

Four of the six panelists are judges appointed by Republican presidents. We hope they can set aside partisanship and help raise the accountability of what is thought to be the most secretive branch of government.