Judicial Watch Exposes NSA Wiretap Judge’s Potential Conflict of Interest

Judicial Watch found this (HT Gateway Pundit):

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, who last week ruled the government’s warrantless wiretapping program unconstitutional, serves as a Secretary and Trustee for a foundation that donated funds to the ACLU of Michigan, a plaintiff in the case (ACLU et. al v. National Security Agency). Judicial Watch discovered the potential conflict of interest after reviewing Judge Diggs Taylor’s financial disclosure statements.

Allah at Hot Air finds fertile ground in the Code of Conduct for Extra-Judicial Activities for construing a potential conflict that should have caused the judge to consider recusing herself, but thinks “she’ll walk.” Well of course she will. We won’t even hear a word from those who don’t hesitate to invent conflicts with strict-constructionist judges, even if we find out that she went hunting with someone on the plaintiff’s team.

__________________________________

UPDATE: RedHawk Review notes that Diggs Taylor at least owed everyone a disclosure of her situation.

UDPATE 2: As if on cue — The New York Times finds an “expert” who thinks Diggs Taylor should have disclosed her situation but did not need to recuse herself. Jim Taranto at Best of the Web found that this same person, Stephen Gillers, criticized Supreme Court Justice Scalia’s hunting trip with Vice President Dick Cheney in 2004 while a case involving the VP was under review.