Thread by @DavidPepper

🚨 🚨

One question: WTF is happening at the Ohio Supreme Court?!?

A 🧵

Just when you thought the ethics meltdown at the Ohio Supreme Court couldn’t get worse….

…we’ve got a conflict so egregious that even Clarence Thomas might shy away from it.

1/

Over the last several years, Ohioans with any sense of ethics have been horrified that the son of the Governor—a sitting Justice—refused to recuse himself from gerrymandering cases where his dad was the named defendant (because he voted for the challenged/illegal maps)

2/

And then, of course, son went on to vote FOR dad’s illegal maps.

Surely, Ohioans have cried out, a son should not be voting in cases involving his own dad.

And yes, ethics rules make clear that those Ohioans are correct: Recusal was required.

3/

But now we have an even more clear-cut problem.

Yes, even clearer than a father-son relationship.

What could be closer than that?

Just wait:

It’s a case being argued tomorrow at the Ohio Supreme Court.

It’s called State of Ohio v. Glover:

4/

It’s a dispute about the length of a criminal sentence, but the substance isn’t what matters here.

It’s ethics 101.

The basics: This case comes out of Hamilton County (Cincinnati).

You’ll see here that the two lawyers representing the County in the case are on the brief

5/

Melissa Powers is the County Prosecutor.

Paula Adams is the Assistant Prosecutor who signed the brief.

So, you’re thinking, who on the Ohio Supreme Court hearing this case Wednesday has a relationship with Powers or Adams?

As direct as a son ruling on behalf of his dad?

6/

Or is someone on the Court related to the defendant…Glover? Or one of his lawyers?

And the answer on all of those is…no.

No such connection.

So what’s the problem?

Well, let’s go back a few years.

7/

The appeal was argued in 2022 in the Court of Appeals for the First District.

Paula Adams, then as now, was one of the lawyers arguing the case.

She signed that brief too. (She lost, hence the appeal).

8/

But if you look closely at the Brief in 2022, a different lawyer was listed on the Prosecutor team w Adams

You see, Melissa Powers is the NEW County prosecutor. She was appointed to fill a vacancy left when her predecessor stepped aside.

Her predecessor is the one on that…

9/

…2022 Brief w Paula Adams.

Here are those documents

They show that that lawyer’s name is…Joseph Deters, the long-time Hamilton County prosecutor.

Ohio Appellate rules make clear that being listed means Deters was counsel in the case.

10/

Those of you from Ohio may know the name, because Gov. DeWine appointed Deters to fill a vacancy on

…the OH Supreme Court

That appointment was met w fierce criticism because of the long, “incestuous” relationship between the DeWine family & Deters:

11/cleveland.com/opinion/2023/0…

We can comb thru all that stuff later.

But for now, what matters is that we have a case before the Ohio Supreme Court, which includes a Justice (potentially a swing vote on a 4-3 court), who was counsel on the original appeal of that case…

And…

12/

..now-Justice Deters is NOT recusing himself from HIS OWN case.

That’s right…he’s sitting tomorrow and hearing a case HE was part of only two years ago—making the very argument then (and losing) that he will review tomorrow.

Yes…that is NUTS.

13/

Scholars can cite some really good Latin going back centuries that underscores the problem here — “Nemo judex in causa sua” (no one is judge in their own case).

But in case that’s too obscure for folks, the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct makes it clear how wrong this is.

14/

Here’s what rule RULE 2.11 says about the situation:

“(A) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the…

15/

…following circumstances:…

7) (a) The judge served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy…

(b) The judge served in governmental employment, and in such capacity participated personally & substantially as a lawyer or public official concerning the particular matter…”

16/

Seems pretty open and shut.

Again, Deters is listed on the appellate brief as a lawyer in this very case only two years ago. That is as bright as a bright line rule gets for recusal.

But according to this story, he plans to hear the case:

17/dispatch.com/story/news/202…

Stunning, yes.

But am I surprised by this?

I wish.

Once a Supreme Court is OK with having a son routinely vote in favor of his dad, the downward slide of ethics is well underway.

So next thing you know, ruling on a case you argued below becomes OK as well.

18/

Things only will slide further from there.

And this is of course all part of a broader context of a state slipping away from the rule of law: a statehouse defying the law, Constitution and court orders; a court allowing an election on a day that directly violates the…

19/

Ohio Revised Code; a son providing the swing votes in favor of his dad’s illegal maps; repeated, blatant corruption.

Now this.

But when it’s happening at the highest court of the state, it especially sends a message that the rule of law is nearing extinction here.

20/

Think about it: the sad reality is we all know that Deters will rule in favor of the argument he made as a lawyer below. And his could well be the vote that decides the outcome.

Those who sign that opinion w him all know that. Meaning the entire Court is tainted by this.

21/

The prosecutors arguing the case—including the one who argued at Deters’ side below—know it.

Same with the opponents.

Yet it all still proceeds with this egregious conflict out in the wide open. As if it’s ok.

As if the outcome was decided by an unbiased court.

22/

And that sets the table for future and similar conflicts to also be overlooked.

Which begs the question: what other conflicts are tainting other cases going through the system?

Because once sons are ruling for dads and justices are hearing appeals of their own cases,

23/

…there really aren’t conflicts left that are worse, are there??

Until people across the aisle in Ohio decide that, at some point, this descent away from the rule of law is too much, it will keep getting worse.

And Ohio will keep slipping because of it.

24/

Which is why tomorrow’s egregious conflict, playing out in arrogant fashion at the highest court in the state, should set off alarm bells.

When will enough be enough?

For more on these issues, follow me here: davidpepper.substack.com