Okay. So you have a judge that takes contributions from a particular entity, say, for campaign funds. And then RULES ON THAT ENTITY'S CASE. WHO doesn't think that's unethical? Well, Judge Scalia, for one.

Supreme Court rules that this is ethical issue and to cut it out.

The Supreme Court ruled today that elected judges must step aside from cases when large campaign contributions from interested parties create the appearance of bias.

By a 5-4 vote in a case from West Virginia, the court said that a judge who remained involved in a lawsuit filed against the company of the most generous supporter of his election deprived the other side of the constitutional right to a fair trial.

"Just as no man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, similar fears of bias can arise when — without the consent of the other parties — a man chooses the judge in his own cause," Justice Anthony Kennedy said for the court.

Wonder what this ruling would have done for Nathan Hecht?   andhere re: Perry Homes.

And what about Scalia?

Both Scalia and Roberts said that the ruling would end up undermining confidence in the judicial system, not enhancing it as the majority contended.

Right. Remember how Scalia went on a hunting trip with Dick Cheney and then ruled on his case Um, guess what, that friggin undermined confidence in the judicial system.