Blind justice.

Byline: The Register-Guard

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is alternately angered and amused by calls that he step aside in a court case involving his friend and hunting chum, Vice President Dick Cheney.

After an initial bristly reaction, Scalia has let it be known that he is now amused by suggestions that there was anything amiss about his flying with Cheney aboard Air Force II last month to Louisiana to shoot ducks as guests of an oil executive. Never mind that the trip came three weeks after the high court agreed to hear the Bush administration's appeal in a case involving secret policy meetings by Cheney's energy task force with energy executives.

``It did not involve a lawsuit against Dick Cheney as a private individual,'' Scalia told a recent gathering at Amherst College. ``This was a government issue. It's acceptable practice to socialize with executive branch officials when there are not personal claims against them. That's all I'm going to say for now. Quack, quack.''

Ah, such sparkling wit. Such overweening arrogance.

Shrouded by the clouds of glory that envelop the Supreme Court, Scalia is unable to see what a growing number of judicial-ethics experts, fellow judges and others can - that the justice exercised appalling judgment in going blind hopping with Cheney. Moreover, the only remedy for this egregious error is for the justice to recuse himself.

The 1974 federal recusal law not lacking in clarity. Judges are not to "permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge," and they must withdraw from any proceeding in which his or her "impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

The law's intent is simple: Appearances matter - and matter a lot. It's irrelevant whether Scalia is being truthful when he says he did nothing to bias his decision in the case. The justice's actions have hurt public confidence and created an appearance of judicial favoritism.

Imagine for a moment that an Oregon State Supreme Court justice is hearing a lawsuit in which the governor is accused of meeting in secret with major construction firms that do business with the state. Then the justice accepts a construction executive's invitation to go scuba diving with the governor on Maui.

Would any justice on Oregon's high court be so foolish - or arrogant - as to accept this invitation? Would any judge who did refuse to recuse him or herself once news of the trip became public?

By refusing to step aside, Scalia is causing further damage to the image of a court that many Americans already suspect acted improperly in 2000 by blocking the Florida recounts ballots and putting George W. Bush in the White House.

Scalia should step aside. To paraphrase the justice: That's all we're going to say for now. Quack, quack.