Pa. Supreme Court Justice Ensnared in Public Porn Shaming

HARRISBURG, Pa.—As the absurd porn scandal continues to play out in Pennsylvania, dragging ever more public officials to an ignominious end to their careers, it is now being revealed that state Supreme Court Justice Seamus McCaffery was also a sender and/or recipient of 230 emails that reportedly contained sexually explicit content. This latest revelation was made today by the court's Chief Justice, Ronald D. Castille. "In a statement, [Castille] said the analysis found McCaffrey had been a sender or recipient of 2,800 messages unearthed during an internal review by the Attorney General's Office," reported Philly.com. "Of those, 234 contained sexually explicit images or videos." The statement also notes, "No other Supreme Court justice was identified as having sent or received any sexually explicit emails." But it is the possible fallout for McCaffrey that seems extreme, and in its own way suggests court politics at play in the same way that Philly.com writers Craig R. McCoy and Angela Couloumbis yesterday outlined in detail the extent to which the entire "porngate" episode is the result of a personal/professional squabble between Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane, who has been selectively identifying people involved in sharing email porn, and her arch rival, former state prosecutor Frank Fina. Indeed, the authors of the article describe the four men who had at that point in time lost their jobs (one more can now be added to the list), as "collateral damage." Now, Chief Justice Castille seems to have a hair up his ass about McCaffrey, and may seek to have him dismissed from the court. "Even before the scope of McCaffery's involvement became clear," reported Philly.com, "Castille last week had called on his fellow justices to take action against the judge." The article also states that it was Castille who "asked Kane to share with him any emails that she discovered had been sent or received by judges or judicial employees," and that, "The chief justice met with a technician from her office last Friday—and the analysis released Wednesday was of the images and videos he was shown at that meeting." But it is the Chief Justice's rationale for being so incensed and also for seeking some sort of official censure of McCaffrey that raises doubts about his sincerity in the matter. According to Philly.com, "Castille has said that any judge who exchanged grossly pornographic material by e-mail might have violated the state's Code of Judicial Ethics and may be subject to discipline," and superficially references "the guidelines in the state Code of Judicial Conduct that prohibit judges, even outside their official judicial actions, 'from doing things that raise questions about their 'integrity.'" But no one has taken the time to explain precisely why a Supreme Court judge looking at or even sending sexual material to someone else (assuming they are a willing recipient) speaks to his or her integrity as an individual or a justice. Indeed, as far as the Chief Justice is concerned, the issue has nothing to do with whether McCaffrey used work or personal accounts; the affront remains the same. Philly.com notes that the code "cites jokes that 'demean individuals' based on factors such as gender" as an example of inappropriate behavior, but what that has to do with the content in question is unknown, since none of it has been described to any degree. To the extent that one person's porn is another's erotica, we simply haven't a clue as to the nature of the material that is now destroying careers for no apparent good reason. Philly.com also reports, "The Supreme Court members can suspend judges, even their own colleagues, for violations, or they can opt to refer infractions to Pennsylvania's Judicial Conduct Board. The board has already opened an investigation into McCaffery's e-mail traffic based on a complaint from a Harrisburg activist." And they call it the City of Brotherly Love.