The Supremes

[Vrede too]

GOP mega donor says Clarence Thomas is victim of ‘political hit job’

The fat cat that bought himself a compliant and greedy SCOTUS justice is now whining that people noticed. Awww. Shame on both of them.

[Vrede too]

Clarence Thomas inspires pizza chain promo deal that made 'every pie on sale, just like' the Supreme Court Justice following report he accepted vacations from GOP donor

Great promo, &pizza! If I was in DC I would be getting a pizza tomorrow.

[GoCubsGo]

Clarence Thomas inspires pizza chain promo deal that made 'every pie on sale, just like' the Supreme Court Justice following report he accepted vacations from GOP donor

Great promo, &pizza! If I was in DC I would be getting a pizza tomorrow.

Their pies are a helluva lot cheaper than buying Clarence Thomas.

[Vrede too]

...

Or anyone else ...

If Congress and the WH were to enact ethical standards for SCOTUS:
They would presumably be enforced by the executive;
Or, they could be enforced by Congress, though I'm not sure how that would work.

Would SCOTUS just deem that this is an unconstitutional infringement on the separation of powers, and would it be correct to to do so?

Could an independent board with teeth be created and would that resolve the issue?

Or, are we just screwed and must accept that SCOTUS will be as corrupt as the current one forever?

[GoCubsGo]

...

Or anyone else ...

If Congress and the WH were to enact ethical standards for SCOTUS:
They would presumably be enforced by the executive;
Or, they could be enforced by Congress, though I'm not sure how that would work.

Would SCOTUS just deem that this is an unconstitutional infringement on the separation of powers, and would it be correct to to do so?

Could an independent board with teeth be created and would that resolve the issue?

Or, are we just screwed and must accept that SCOTUS will be as corrupt as the current one forever?

It'd probably have to be voluntary.

[Vrede too]

It'd probably have to be voluntary.

That might happen some year, but not with this SCOTUS.

[O Really]

It's another piece of flotsam from the Trump destruction. Historically, the Supreme Court has policed itself pretty well because the people serving as Justices were mindful and respectful of their position and responsibilities and - because they were, generally, selected with a career record demonstrating such care and respect for the law. Trump pushed through cronies that have little to no concern for the law, and Roberts isn't able or willing to control them. Handbaskets, Hell, locusts, pestilence.

[Vrede too]

It's another piece of flotsam from the Trump destruction. Historically, the Supreme Court has policed itself pretty well because the people serving as Justices were mindful and respectful of their position and responsibilities and - because they were, generally, selected with a career record demonstrating such care and respect for the law. Trump pushed through cronies that have little to no concern for the law, and Roberts isn't able or willing to control them. Handbaskets, Hell, locusts, pestilence.

Sounds like impeachment is the only recourse, and that will never happen with the equally corrupt congressional GQP.

[neoplacebo]

...

Or anyone else ...

If Congress and the WH were to enact ethical standards for SCOTUS:
They would presumably be enforced by the executive;
Or, they could be enforced by Congress, though I'm not sure how that would work.

Would SCOTUS just deem that this is an unconstitutional infringement on the separation of powers, and would it be correct to to do so?

Could an independent board with teeth be created and would that resolve the issue?

Or, are we just screwed and must accept that SCOTUS will be as corrupt as the current one forever?

Maybe they could have some sort of Inspector General like a lot of other government agencies have. It would have to be composed equally of federal judges and bullshit stompers. Or maybe they could have some sort of computer that would advise them or tell them if they're fucking up. In either case, I can't see how any enforcement apparatus would work. The way they're set up, the Supremes are pretty much supreme. Hell, just look at Clarence. He's like a goddamn honey badger; he don't care.

[Vrede too]

Maybe they could have some sort of Inspector General like a lot of other government agencies have. It would have to be composed equally of federal judges and bullshit stompers. Or maybe they could have some sort of computer that would advise them or tell them if they're fucking up. In either case, I can't see how any enforcement apparatus would work. The way they're set up, the Supremes are pretty much supreme. Hell, just look at Clarence. He's like a goddamn honey badger; he don't care.

SCOTUS is even more corrupt than we already knew.

Neil Gorsuch Has Joined the Supreme Court Ethics Scandal Party

Clarence Thomas is not alone. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch has also benefitted financially from parties with an interest in the high court’s business while neglecting to disclose the relationship, growing concerns over corruption within the institution.

Politico reported on Tuesday that Gorsuch had been trying to sell a piece of land in Colorado for nearly two years before Brian Duffy — the CEO of Greenberg Traurig, a law firm whose cases often find their way before the Supreme Court — bought it on April 16, 2017.

The exact date is significant. It was only nine days after Gorsuch was confirmed.

Gorsuch noted on federal disclosure forms that he made between $250,001 and $500,000 on the sale. The forms included a space where Gorsuch could have disclosed the identity of the purchaser, but he left it blank. Politico notes that Greenberg Traurig has since had 22 cases come before the court, and that in the 12 instances in which Gorsuch’s opinion was recorded, he sided with his benefactor’s firm on eight of them — including one that damaged the Clean Air Act....

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Neil is the son of Reagan's corrupt and disgraced industry shill EPA Administrator, Anne M. Gorsuch.

[GoCubsGo]

It's another piece of flotsam from the Trump destruction. Historically, the Supreme Court has policed itself pretty well because the people serving as Justices were mindful and respectful of their position and responsibilities and - because they were, generally, selected with a career record demonstrating such care and respect for the law. Trump pushed through cronies that have little to no concern for the law, and Roberts isn't able or willing to control them. Handbaskets, Hell, locusts, pestilence.

Sounds like impeachment is the only recourse, and that will never happen with the equally corrupt congressional GQP.

Accountability?

Nope.

[Vrede too]

Accountability?

Nope.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FumOXskXoAE ... name=large

Never.

Abortion opinion leak made conservative justices 'targets of assassination': Alito



It was leaked by Alito or an aide in order to keep Boof and Barrett from defecting to a Roberts compromise.

[GoCubsGo]

Accountability?

Nope.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FumOXskXoAE ... name=large

Never.

Abortion opinion leak made conservative justices 'targets of assassination': Alito



It was leaked by Alito or an aide in order to keep Boof and Barrett from defecting to a Roberts compromise.

He might not be wrong, I'm sure many, many people had those thoughts.

But he's sounding more and more like a full fledged wingnut.

[Vrede too]

Abortion opinion leak made conservative justices 'targets of assassination': Alito



It was leaked by Alito or an aide in order to keep Boof and Barrett from defecting to a Roberts compromise.

He might not be wrong, I'm sure many, many people had those thoughts.

But he's sounding more and more like a full fledged wingnut.

Idk, someone leaking in hopes that 2 Justices would be assassinated seems more farfetched than my scenario, IMO. Plus, there's the mysterious inability of the "investigation" to find a perp when it's a con court.


All 9 Supreme Court justices push back on oversight: 'Raises more questions,' Senate chair says

Does this SCOTUS unanimity mean that they're all as corrupt as con Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch?

[GoCubsGo]

Does this SCOTUS unanimity mean that they're all as corrupt as con Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch?

There really is no check or balance on The Supremes.

It's very troubling. Until recently there integrity was never questioned although their decisions were.

Another trump legacy.

[O Really]

It's very troubling. Until recently there integrity was never questioned although their decisions were.

Another trump legacy.

One of the saddest comments I've read lately.
When the highest guardians of the law are corrupt, the country is truly in deep shit. Trump and trumpers have made it very difficult to separate the "bad apple" from the barrel since their largely successful campaign to weaken confidence in institutions as a whole. So every instance of individual misbehaviour becomes another indictment on the whole.

[GoCubsGo]

It's very troubling. Until recently there integrity was never questioned although their decisions were.

Another trump legacy.

One of the saddest comments I've read lately.
When the highest guardians of the law are corrupt, the country is truly in deep shit. Trump and trumpers have made it very difficult to separate the "bad apple" from the barrel since their largely successful campaign to weaken confidence in institutions as a whole. So every instance of individual misbehaviour becomes another indictment on the whole.

We're doomed.

[Vrede too]

Does this SCOTUS unanimity mean that they're all as corrupt as con Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch?

There really is no check or balance on The Supremes.

It's very troubling. Until recently their integrity was never questioned although their decisions were.

Another trump legacy.

One of the saddest comments I've read lately.
When the highest guardians of the law are corrupt, the country is truly in deep shit. Trump and trumpers have made it very difficult to separate the "bad apple" from the barrel since their largely successful campaign to weaken confidence in institutions as a whole. So every instance of individual misbehaviour becomes another indictment on the whole.

We're doomed.

Speaking of judicial corruption:

Judge in Catholic bankruptcy recuses over church donations

A federal judge overseeing the New Orleans Roman Catholic bankruptcy recused himself in a late-night reversal that came a week after an Associated Press report showed he donated tens of thousands of dollars to the archdiocese and consistently ruled in favor of the church in the case involving nearly 500 clergy sex abuse victims.

U.S. District Judge Greg Guidry initially announced hours after the AP report that he would stay on the case, citing the opinion of fellow federal judges that no “reasonable person” could question his impartiality.

Xtian "morality".

But amid mounting pressure and persistent questions, he changed course late Friday in a terse, one-page filing.

“I have decided to recuse myself from this matter in order to avoid any possible appearance of personal bias or prejudice,” Guidry wrote.

The 62-year-old jurist has overseen the 3-year-old bankruptcy in an appellate role, and his recusal is likely to throw the case into disarray and trigger new hearings and appeals of every consequential ruling he's made.

Thanks a lot, asshole. The victims are molested again.

... P's review of campaign-finance records showed that Guidry, since being nominated to the federal bench in 2019 by then-President Donald Trump,

Of course he was.

gave nearly $50,000 to local Catholic charities from leftover political contributions from his decade serving as a Louisiana Supreme Court justice. Most of that giving, $36,000, came in the months after the archdiocese sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in May 2020 amid a crush of sexual abuse lawsuits.

Guidry also served on the board of Catholic Charities, the archdiocese’s charitable arm, between 2000 and 2008, as the archdiocese was navigating an earlier wave of sex abuse lawsuits.

In the bankruptcy, Guidry frequently issued key rulings that altered the momentum of the bankruptcy and benefited the archdiocese.

Just last month, he upheld a $400,000 sanction against Richard Trahant, a veteran attorney for clergy abuse victims who was accused of violating a sweeping confidentiality order when he warned a local principal that his school had hired a priest who admitted to sex abuse. He also rebuffed at least one request to unseal secret church documents, part of a trove of records detailing clergy abuse in New Orleans going back decades.

... “The public shouldn’t have to rely on a judge’s personal certainty about his own rectitude,” Clark added. “The fact that he would even make this assertion shows how misguided and ethically blind this judge is.”

It's just a rumor that Guidry has claimed to be a perfect judge who only makes perfect rulings.

... James Adams, a creditor in the bankruptcy who alleges he was abused by a priest as a fifth grader in 1980, says the judge’s recusal was long overdue.

“Like the church, some federal judges will often do the right thing only after the press begins to investigate and question them,” he said. “Inflated ego and arrogance can be a dangerous side effect of putting on a black robe.”

He really should be sanctioned or impeached, but I won't hold my breath.

[GoCubsGo]

[Vrede too]

https://twitter.com/AmoneyResists/statu ... 7939691520

He's even lost Repubs:
https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/20 ... -of-ethics