A council dispute out in Sparks has made it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Back in 2006, a councilman did not recuse himself from a vote when he was friends with a related developer. He says the city attorney told him there was no personal conflict, and thus no need to recuse himself. But the state's ethics commission accused him of doing the wrong thing. Now, they're battling out in the highest court in the nation. The Supreme Court's decision could affect state and local ethics laws everywhere. How would it affect our ethics laws here in Nevada? When should people recuse themselves? And why is the news media claiming a decision could infringe its freedom of speech?
GUEST Caren Jenkins, Exec Dir, Nevada Commission on Ethics Joshua Rosenkranz, Attorney for Michael Carrigan Josiah Neeley, Attorney, Bopp, Coleson & Bostrom
We are expected to TRUST politicians when they prove over and over that many of them are corrupt. These people need to be kept in line.James –May 19, 2011 09:30:26 AM
Suggestion.. take the comments made by the Supreme Court to discredit or challenge his statements. They are much smarter than you are.
This lawyer from Reno is so full of &())(*.. however this ultra conservative Supreme Court who allowed freedom of speach to companies throwing out 60-70 years of previous court decisions will likely uphold his "rights".
Regarding the company in West Virginia.. the company bought the judge.. I would not even bring up that decision in this issue. HOW STUPID!!
Will Schroeder –May 19, 2011 09:28:40 AM