I can't be the only American more bummed about Roberts' household conflict--and it is a clear conflict--than about Thomas'. Surely most people always knew that the ceiling was pretty low for Justice Thomas; after all, Anita Hill was eminently believable in testifying at his confirmation hearings.
Chief Justice Roberts should know full well that Jane Roberts' manipulation of her economic niche is at *very best* unseemly. If this is the person we are counting on to say "hold on now, there are limits"--and I think we are!--one wonders if the Chief Justice even holds to those limits personally.
Too bad Congress has no power to impose ethics rules on the justices of the Supreme Court.
The only powers the Congress, or the President, have over the Supreme Court are:
The President nominates replacement justices,
The Senate confirms, or rejects, the President’s nominees,
The Congress determines the salary for SCOTUS justices (and can’t reduce it during their term),
The Congress can restrict the appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS,
The Congress determines the amount of the appropriations to operate SCOTUS,
The Congress determines how many justices sit on the High Court,
And, the House can impeach a justice, then the Senate can remove the impeached justice.
That’s it. The Congress and President have no other power to regulate SCOTUS. They cannot impose on SCOTUS rules of ethics. SCOTUS, on their own authority, agreed to their own ethical guidelines. The law passed by Congress in 1989 (Ethics Reform Act) requiring SCOTUS justices to report gifts over $415 is unconstitutional and unenforceable.
The Supreme Court is a separate, equal branch of the Federal Government. Each justice serves “on good behavior.” The only rememdy to stop a justice is to impeach and remove him from office for “Treason, Bribery, and other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
The Thomases are collecting the money and living the life that they believe is their due.
One thing on the ethics of this: I have yet to see a case, a vote, an Opinion, which he changed from what he otherwise would have done. He is so reliably a fellow of Leonard Leo, they even get in the same painting. No one has to tell him what to do in conference.
The Supreme Court just depresses me now. It’s become the judicial wing of the Republican Party.
Now do George Soros backed prosecutors and political prosecutions.
I can't be the only American more bummed about Roberts' household conflict--and it is a clear conflict--than about Thomas'. Surely most people always knew that the ceiling was pretty low for Justice Thomas; after all, Anita Hill was eminently believable in testifying at his confirmation hearings.
Chief Justice Roberts should know full well that Jane Roberts' manipulation of her economic niche is at *very best* unseemly. If this is the person we are counting on to say "hold on now, there are limits"--and I think we are!--one wonders if the Chief Justice even holds to those limits personally.
I would argue that in moving the nation’s laws to the right they are moving the country to the left.
Too bad Congress has no power to impose ethics rules on the justices of the Supreme Court.
The only powers the Congress, or the President, have over the Supreme Court are:
The President nominates replacement justices,
The Senate confirms, or rejects, the President’s nominees,
The Congress determines the salary for SCOTUS justices (and can’t reduce it during their term),
The Congress can restrict the appellate jurisdiction of SCOTUS,
The Congress determines the amount of the appropriations to operate SCOTUS,
The Congress determines how many justices sit on the High Court,
And, the House can impeach a justice, then the Senate can remove the impeached justice.
That’s it. The Congress and President have no other power to regulate SCOTUS. They cannot impose on SCOTUS rules of ethics. SCOTUS, on their own authority, agreed to their own ethical guidelines. The law passed by Congress in 1989 (Ethics Reform Act) requiring SCOTUS justices to report gifts over $415 is unconstitutional and unenforceable.
The Supreme Court is a separate, equal branch of the Federal Government. Each justice serves “on good behavior.” The only rememdy to stop a justice is to impeach and remove him from office for “Treason, Bribery, and other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
The Thomases are collecting the money and living the life that they believe is their due.
One thing on the ethics of this: I have yet to see a case, a vote, an Opinion, which he changed from what he otherwise would have done. He is so reliably a fellow of Leonard Leo, they even get in the same painting. No one has to tell him what to do in conference.
If they continue on this trajectory, Congress might actually need to legislate again.
When you have 2 right wing billionaires;Harlan Crow and Leonard Leo, involved with a Justice and his wife, financially and gratuitously,
over many years, and these
same "friends" have had business before the Court
in which this Justice was the
deciding vote in their favor,
I truly think it stinks.
I agree it's a crying shame, a
brighter light hasn't been shown on the SCOTUS and
my fear is Thomas will get
geteven for the exposure.