My opinion is that we should point out the supreme amount of corruption in the highest court of the land, every single day, for as long as it takes. This cannot be normalized. Make them pay. Hound the corrupt bastards every single day until they decide that life’s too short.
They are counting on us to let this slip into this is just one more thing that’s so terribly wrong but there’s nothing we can do about it territory.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse is leading the charge, but he shouldn’t be out there alone, as he has been for most of the past 5 years.
What can we do to to make sure that this issue stays front and center until it is resolved?
In which @DahliaLithwick and @TheLisaGraves hit it out of the park:https://t.co/YUJDcKbDAD
— Sheldon Whitehouse (@SenWhitehouse) May 9, 2023
(Slate)
Yes. It’s astonishing. For Clarence Thomas to assert that people told him he didn’t have to disclose this—I think he should have to respond under oath, under penalty of perjury, and name each and every person in government or out of government who told him that he did not have to provide public disclosure of these sorts of gifts, particularly the gift of travel on private jets or Harlan Crow’s luxury yacht, because thousands of people employed by the federal government routinely follow those rules. The rules allowing for personal hospitality of a close friend are described in the instructions to comply with that statute. As you know, a meal, like a birthday meal from a friend or a small gift, is exempt—but not travel. Private jets, private yachts are not considered gifts of hospitality like a dinner. These are gifts; they’re valuable gifts. And they really put a stain on the court and on the integrity of the court.
On this question of “we’re just friends”: They’re not just friends. Let’s look at the cases pending before the court this term. Right now, there are three cases where the Manhattan Institute has submitted amicus briefs to this Supreme Court, including the student debt case. Kathy Crow—one of Clarence and Ginni Thomas’ “best friends”—is a trustee. So basically, she’s a funder and a director of the Manhattan Institute. Has Clarence Thomas recused from the cases involving the amicus brief submitted by his best friend? No.
I think there are a lot of issues at stake here, including what’s been uncovered about Harlan Crow’s having business before the court. But it’s also the case that Harlan Crow isn’t just a billionaire. He’s a billionaire who has spent a lot of money trying to influence law in this country and influence who wins offices, including who gets on the Supreme Court. In fact, Harlan Crow was a donor to one of the groups that helped spend money to get John Roberts and Samuel Alito onto the Supreme Court. So he has a deep and intense interest, it seems, in what’s happening with this court and who is on this court. And now he’s been spending years rewarding someone on the court.
BREAKING: Harlan Crow and his family's average yearly political contributions went up 862% after Citizens United was decided in 2010.
Who provided a deciding vote for that case?
Justice Clarence Thomas, a "family friend" they showered with luxury travel and gifts for 20+ years. pic.twitter.com/GS2KCq6ktd
— Americans For Tax Fairness (@4TaxFairness) May 1, 2023
Nothing to see here. //
Open thread.
Omnes Omnibus
Point out that Kagan turned down bagels from high school friends while Thomas went on luxury yachts.
Jerzy Russian
Man, I have got the wrong set of friends. My current set of “friends” haven’t done squat for me regarding yacht trips, private islands, luxury resorts, etc.
patrick II
I have been curious if the travel expenses were declared as income on Thomas’ taxes. If a gift is valued at more than $17,000 this year it should be declared in 2023 — and lower gift tax optimums in past years. The trips that I have read about almost certainly exceeded the gift tax limit.
Old School
Senator Whitehouse has the right idea. Senators, reps, POTUS, VPOTUS and other democrats need to keep talking about it and holding hearings about it. It’ll also help if places like Pro Publica keep up releasing information about new gifts that come to light.
What Have The Romans Ever Done for Us?
As a federal employee I gotta say the argument “I didn’t think had to report much less turn down the offer” argument is just fucking ridiculous. This guy is supposed to be one of the preeminent experts in US law. A bog standard GS 12 COR knows these rules and is capable of following them.
He’s either lying or admitted he’s a complete and utter incompetent moron. I mean, everyone knows he’s lying but folks could do a better job of pointing out that his BS defense is he’s too stupid to figure out the rules and follow them. Not a good look for a Supreme Court Justice. I mean, why are we supposed to respect your legal decisions if you can’t figure out something every federal worker seems to be able to understand? Your explanation indicates you should resign in disgrace for complete incompetence.
bk
@patrick II: Gifts are not taxable income to recipients. The gift tax limit applies to those who are making the gifts.
What Have The Romans Ever Done for Us?
@patrick II: I’ve been wondering how (or if) they reported this stuff on their taxes too. Seems like something the IRS should look into.
Omnes Omnibus
@patrick II: Not taxable as income to the recipient. Gift tax is payable by the donor and not reported on any income tax forms.
cckids
@Jerzy Russian:
But what are you doing/could you be doing for them? Have you asked yourself that? //
WaterGirl
@Omnes Omnibus: Wow, how pissed are the ones who have been doing this right?
Seriously whatever happened to “not just impropriety, but the appearance of impropriety”?
All these cheating grifters on the Supreme Court are not filling me with confidence.
WaterGirl
Even Cole makes front-pagers report gifts from BJ peeps. //
bbleh
Shamelessness is their superpower. I’m sure Thomas is furious at all this criticism from the rabble.
But yes, point it out, not to shame them but to drive the discourse and scorch their reputations.
@Jerzy Russian: @cckids: yeah maybe they have the wrong set of friends. //
karen marie
@patrick II: I was reading about gift taxes early on in this saga, because I too wondered if Thomas had declared the gifts, and what I understood was that the gift-giver is responsible for the taxes.
Crow is “a holder of a “cashport” … to St. Kitts and Nevis, another country that is well known as a tax haven.”
If the “gifts” were paid for through Crow Holdings’ offshore accounts, there would be nothing to report to the IRS.
sdhays
Serious question: What should be the rule regarding amicus briefs? Amicus briefs don’t directly have business before the Court, so should a Justice really recuse just because someone they’re buddies with files an amicus brief?
Obviously, Thomas is crooked, so anything touching that relationship is pretty much corrupt by definition, but what would be a reasonable expectation for Justices operating in good faith regarding relationships with people filing amicus briefs?
AlaskaReader
Impeach Thomas
bbleh
@sdhays: people who file amicus briefs often have an interest in the case, but it’s their interest that’s the issue, not the brief.
If a Justice has a significant-enough relationship with someone who has a significant-enough interest in a case, then s/he should recuse. And no, I have no idea where to draw the lines for “enough,” but I think the principle is correct.
JPL
Since Roberts refuses to testify, why not ask Kagan and quiz her about the bagel.
sdhays
@bbleh: Thanks.
karen marie
Fixed it for you.
sdhays
@JPL: Why punish her for doing the right thing?
bbleh
@JPL: … and thus was Bagelgate born. (Observers commented that it had long been only a matter of when, not if.)
But seriously folks (don’t forget to tip your server), I feel kinda bad for the Three, cuz they’re caught having to live and work — from a weaker position — every day with people whose behavior is reprehensible. If they call them out, it would kinda poison the working relationship.
@karen marie: I agree the bar should be set pretty low, consistent with “conflict or appearance of conflict.” But I’m not gonna say Sotomayor should recuse because a major shareholder of a firm that’s party to a case before her lives in the same small NY apartment building and they encounter each other regularly in the garage.
West of the Rockies
They are such a physically repellant pair. Ugh.
dc
Thomas would not be offered these gifts if he were not a Supreme Court Justice. They are not gifts coming from friends.
Matt McIrvin
@sdhays: That could be gamed, too: get a useful idiot who knows one of the Justices to file an amicus brief so they have to recuse.
Baud
@Matt McIrvin:
Yes, the usual rule is that amicus briefs are not allowed if it would force a judge to recuse.
cain
@bbleh: Believe me in this climate – if it was a Republican presidency – they would pick that shit up and force her to resign over that goddam bagel.
Matt McIrvin
@cain: “Russia, if you’re listening, we need those bagel receipts.”
karen marie
@bbleh: The question of impartiality in that situation is definitely something that should be explored. Jurors are excused on that basis every day of the week.
I’ve not seen many recusals in my 40 years of transcribing criminal trials but they’ve all resulted from the type of minor relationship you describe.
Jay
Did Ginni Thomas take any Russian money?
It would be irresponsible to not speculate.
paul w, of roscoe village chicago
there is a very simple reason that the senate isn’t going to try to force an ethics policy on the supremes. probably half of them have spouses/significant others that are lobbyists and likely to be hoisted on their own petards during the debate (and yes, i’m looking at you toosenator durbin).
JPL
@sdhays: Not a punishment as much as a forum as saying this is how you do it. imo
narya
@paul w, of roscoe village chicago: (Waves from the People’s Republic of Rogers Park . . .) And the thing is, it starts getting genuinely complex, even for people who are trying to actually be good about it. Now that wimminfolk aren’t necessarily relegated to the home, it’s not uncommon for both members of a couple to have professional lives–and, for example, if you met in law school, you are going to be traveling neighboring professional paths. Even, or especially, if you’re trying hard NOT to be grifting jerks about it, how do you set rules for that? Not impossible, of course, but not necessarily simple, either.
TheOtherHank
This will never happen, but the administration should only count the votes of the 5 supremes that we don’t have proof are corrupt.
“This raw vote for this case was 6 to 3, but since Thomas, Gorsuch, Roberts, and Kavanaugh are known to be utterly corrupt, we will observe that the real vote was 2 to 3 and will proceed with that understanding.”
Alito is garbage, but we don’t know that he took money. Coney-Barret is some kind of religious fanatic, but again, maybe she hasn’t taken bribes.
Chris Johnson
@Jay: Well, if you ask me… ;)
I do wonder how far it spreads. Some recipients are real obvious, but aren’t some just willing collaborators?
JPL
@JPL: I might add that they could call all and see who shows up.
Ceci n est pas mon nym
As a former federal employee who was scrupulous about this stuff, I would describe my level of pissed-off-ness as somewhere above “incandescent with rage.”
eversor
Worth noting that the Federalist Society exists because Leo got upset about the lack of Christian power in the US. The corporate power exists to serve traditional Christian views. But we aren’t going to talk about that, or deal with it. Because actually solving any of the issues facing us means liberals don’t get to keep their fake ass pretend farce of Christianity.
Until we are willing to deal with that. Until the cross is a swastika and the bible is mein kampf all these fights are loss and anybody not willing to cross that line and deal with it is a fucking nazi.
Jay
@narya:
It’s actually not that hard.
Back in the day, rule was, I couldn’t even accept a cup of coffee from a customer or a vendor.
Any major gifts were turned in, and raffled away at the Christmas Party.
When we were acquired by a Fortune 100, about 2 years in, Corporate IT did a audit of ERP account permissions. They kinda freaked out about mine. I could RFQ, purchase, receive, issue, audit, pay. I had those permissions because I trained everybody on those systems.
I could have stolen millions with none the wiser.
T had a job, where the “inside” information, could have been used. It wasn’t.
Omnes Omnibus
@eversor: Fuck you. If you want call anyone not onboard with your pogrom a Nazi, then you really are a despicable little shit.
japa21
@eversor: IANAL, but I don’t know if I should sue you for slander, libel or defamation of character. Maybe all 3. I’ll let Omnes advise me on the matter after he calls you a bigoted ass again. Although he is too nice to use the ass word.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@eversor:
Come on, man. You know people have complained about this in the past. The constant anti-Christianity tirades are getting tedious and this is coming from someone who’s an atheist. You’re alienating people and that’s not something you want to do
Jay
@japa21:
day drinking, not just for remote workers anymore,//
The Kropenhagen Interpretation
I remember a political party, once upon a time in Germany, that implemented pogroms and promoted a with us or against us mentality.
patrick II
@bk:
@Omnes Omnibus:
It is pretty clear that I have never given over $17,000 to anyone. It makes it nice for bribees everywhere I gueess.
Maxim
It’s kind of weird that the gifter is supposed to pay the taxes. Aren’t other kinds of gifts (like, say, if I give my niece more in a year than the IRS allows) taxable on the recipient side? It seems like a very bribe-friendly exception.
Matthew
The Forwards has an article about Elena Kagan response to a deli gift basket from old classmates. Not all justices see the position as Thomas seems to. Doesn’t take a legal genius to know when something doesn’t pass the smell test!
forward.com/fast-forward/546201/elena-kagan-clarence-thomas-bagels-and-lox/
bk
@eversor: Not this shit again.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Maxim:
It absolutely is
Omnes Omnibus
@Maxim: Think of it as going hand in hand with the estate tax. Transfers of wealth are taxed to the transferor not the transferee
ETA: No, your niece gets all the money you gave. You are liable for any gift tax. Or you could treat it as an advance against her share of your estate if applicable. It would reduce what you could transfer tax free, but if your estate is below the threshold it would have no real world effect.
ETAA: I actually enjoyed my trusts and estates class.
bk
@Maxim: The very abridged version is that the gift tax limitation (and thus the tax on amounts in excess of that) is designed to target people who would otherwise try to avoid federal estate taxes by giving away all/most/some of their assets during their lifetimes.
Miss Bianca
@eversor: Oh, Christ, it’s this asshole again.
Shalimar
@eversor: So all of us are nazis except you. You ever wonder why everyone hurries away whenever you approach?
terraformer
damn right, this is fading from the news – by design
this is a fcking emergency, and other proven horribleness from other Republicans is moving the spotlight
even worse, because it’s not just one thing – an initial pour, now a steady drip of other examples when a US Supreme Court Justice just gosh darn it can’t seem to get those pesky reporting requirements right. I mean, legal things are difficult right
other examples from other Justices too. We can’t let this slip – and Dems should hit this hard. There are so, so many horrible things Dems can point to, and the last thing we need is navel-gazing and pussyfooting around
Take it to ’em – hard
cain
@eversor: for all your other experiences – it just seems like a waste to only share this particular diatribe. You’re not going to see the death of Christianity anytime soon.
But if it makes you feel better – the rate of people who don’t call themselves Christian has been growing. A religion with adherents that aren’t even consistent with the core teachings of their holy book doesn’t stay in business for the long term.
frosty
@eversor: I can’t believe I didn’t have you pied for your tedious rants. Off you go!
Elizabelle
@eversor: Please go away. Come back, and comment on something else later, if you like, but what you post is ugly and disturbing.
Hint: we’ve been this way before. Just substitute Jew, or Muslim, or Moor or gypsy or foreigner for Christian.
Also: this is not a blog filled with people who marvel at the fidelity of “Christians” to their ideals.
Couldn’t you find some other hobby?
WaterGirl
@JPL: Call each of them and then make public who was willing to appear and who wasn’t.
Elizabelle
FWIW, I think this Clarence and Ginni Thomas corruption story is going to have legs. There is just too much of it. Further, we don’t even know what DOJ has, or what the J6 Committee discovered but did not make public.
People are too furious over Dobbs. Except for the MAGATs and billionaires, an unaccountable Supreme Court, which will not follow precedent, is terrifying.
Elizabelle
LA Times. Good. We cannot have people killing each other on public transportation.
New York man to be charged in subway chokehold killing of Jordan Neely
The Marine veteran who put a Black man in a chokehold on a New York City subway last week, killing him, will face charges and is expected to turn himself in to authorities Friday, prosecutors said.
Daniel Penny, 24, will be arrested on suspicion of second-degree manslaughter in the May 1 death of Jordan Neely, a spokesperson for the Manhattan district attorney’s office said in a statement.
Elizabelle
I think someone should put together a reel of all the confirmation hearings, when the GOP justices swore to uphold precedent. No doubt someone already has. But cut it into a format that would make a Stephen Colbert audience laugh at the hypocrisy.
Scout211
As expected. Tacopants has filed an appeal for his client, whats-his-name.
The Kropenhagen Interpretation
I go with Takoyaki. Weird texture and a little fishy.
The Kropenhagen Interpretation
@The Kropenhagen Interpretation: Yes, I know it’s octopus not fish.
RSA
I’m just spitballing, but I think that one of Clarence Thomas’s deepest desires is for respectability. Keeping his corruption in the news punctures his beliefs every day he picks up a newspaper. That’s a tiny consolation as we try to fix our long-term political problems.
Omnes Omnibus
@Elizabelle: Some precedents should be overturned. Plessy v. Ferguson was binding precedent. The Court should be very careful about what and when it overturns though. This Court is not.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Elizabelle:
Good. That was horrible. 15 minutes and nobody did a thing
Mallard Filmore
Would that cancel out the “gift” status and then revert to income for Thomas?
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@The Kropenhagen Interpretation:
I’m partial to Tapioca for Tacopina
The Kropenhagen Interpretation
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): I’m partial to tapioca for my tea. Delicious little bubbles.
Steve in the ATL
@Jerzy Russian:
Seriously. When Omnes took me to Sandals for a week last year, I had to fly commercial. FML!
Josie
@Ceci n est pas mon nym:
It’s not just that they are corrupt, but that they are telling the rest of us what our morality should consist of and how we should live our lives. I wish I could have the opportunity to express my rage to their arrogant faces.
ETA: Also, I would like to request that commenter eversor be given a timeout. Half of this thread is desserts and I am on sugar overload.
Elizabelle
@Omnes Omnibus: Agreed.
And the conservatives have never forgiven Brown vs. the Board of Education. Or FDR and the New Deal.
But Brown and FDR and the Civil Rights Act and Roe v. Wade helped drag us into the 21st century. And we are still so far behind most other “first world” nations WRT a safety net.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Steve in the ATL:
Was it at least First/Business class?
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@The Kropenhagen Interpretation:
I don’t think I’ve ever had tapioca pudding
raven
Maxim
@bk: That makes sense.
Omnes Omnibus
@Steve in the ATL: What have you done for me lately?
Gvg
Did Thomas obey the reporting requirements before he was on the Supreme Court? He was a federal judge before right? I don’t think he can claim not to know the law. And he quit reporting anything after another outcry before. Didn’t stop, just quit reporting it. That is guilty behavior. He knows it’s wrong.
Omnes Omnibus
@raven: Yep. And good.
prostratedragon
Save us and help us, I just fiund myself shouting, “Right on!” to Mehdi Hasan.
raven
@Omnes Omnibus: Me and the Moore’s coming back from the 10th Anniversary of the Wall.
Omnes Omnibus
@raven: Cool pic.
ETA: The Wall has different meanings over the generations. To you, the war memorial. To me, the Iron Curtain and Berlin. Now, Trump’s wall.
Baud
@prostratedragon:
Dios mio!
Ohio Mom
@Elizabelle: I was very glad to see Daniel Penny’s name, it annoyed me no end that he was granted privacy (for what reason?), and very, very glad to see charges against him.
As I pointed out on an earlier, Jordan Neely had both autism and schizophrenia. That he was the victim of such horrific violence could be considered predictable, people with both conditions are often victimized.
Elizabelle
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): It is kind of sweet and you have to be OK with the texture.
Definitely more fun as Boba Tea. You should try some pudding, though. Get a little single serving in the refrigerated case at the grocery.
I still prefer chocolate pudding and flans, but tapioca is fun.
Elizabelle
@Ohio Mom: That story is such a tragedy. Have not paid much attention, but it some ways it is even worse than Kitty Genovese.
I am so glad Greg Abbott and all the gunhumpers are going to get right on fixing our mental health care issues, though. Don’t you take comfort in that? Gag.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@raven:
Nice picture
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Elizabelle:
I’ll do that! I like chocolate pudding myself
Elizabelle
Outside listening to the birds. It is a symphony. I wish they would eat all the mulberries (??) that are falling on my patio. It is a bumper crop; never seen anything like it.
Today, the little Frenchie had a berry stain on her butt. Cuz she apparently sat on one. We will see how long that takes to fade. It is bright grape jelly color.
raven
@Omnes Omnibus: Mrs Moore was so sweet. I was with my buddies from Athens and she said “I like you boys but I’m still for Auburn”!!
Elizabelle
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): Tapioca is good as an alternative. But in chocolate pudding, we trust.
I love that pudding is shelf stable. For when we don’t have ice cream …
raven
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): Yea, hard for me to believe it was 19 years ago.
raven
@Omnes Omnibus: And to my Floyd loving bother. . .
Elizabelle
New thread up. “Lifestyle Changes.” Sounded highly like it would be from Cole.
And it is.
Josie
@Elizabelle:
The chocolate pudding is ok, but I really love the flan, possibly because I am too lazy to make flan.
Elizabelle
@Josie: I love zabaglione. Now THAT is hard to find.
There was an Italian restaurant in DC. Food was terrible. But the chef made the best zabaglione.
Should have just stuck with wine and dessert. I think the bread may have been OK. I think we even got butter with it; not just olive oil …
I keep meaning to learn how to make it. Seems like you just have to get the trick, of the proper heat …
Alton Brown’s recipe.
I love marsala.
NotMax
@Elizabelle
And you can dance to it.
:)
grumbles
For my part, I’ve been using Clarence Crow as the punchline for random jokes. Today at work someone jokingly suggested something illegal, and my response was “Oh, if we could try that, and if we get caught, we could just buy a justice’s relative a house. We’ve spent more on insurance.”
It wasn’t even intentional at first. But those two are just comically corrupt, the jokes write themselves.
BlueGuitarist
Thanks WG for keeping us attentive to this.
A good/recognizable label would help: Thomas Crow Affair?
Reminder that yesterday Kay posted a link to a
link to article
levernews.com/clarence-thomas-reversed-position-after-gifts-and-family-payments/
Kay’s summary of key part:
zhena gogolia
@prostratedragon: what did he say?
karen marie
@Omnes Omnibus: Pie exists.
TriassicSands
That is not an either/or proposition.
Roger Moore
@Maxim:
No. They’re only taxable on the giver’s side. There’s also a $17K/year/person tax free gift, and also a ~$12M lifetime limit on top of that per year limit. So even if you give your niece more than $17K this year, the additional amount would count against that $12M lifetime limit. Note, though, that the $12M lifetime limit also covers estate taxes, so a rich person who gives away enough to reach the limit doesn’t have any of their estate exempted from tax.
Jackie
@prostratedragon: lol
Mehdi Hasan does have his moments. I can’t abide his show, but he’s good as a guest on other shows.
TriassicSands
One thing that mystifies me is people who think Thomas is being bribed. The money, the gifts, none of that is meant as a bribe. They are all rewards. And not for delivering a surprise or close call, but for being who he is and being 100% reliable. Alito must be searching for a similar sugar daddy. After all, he’s just as insane and radical as Clarence is. Why shouldn’t someone be lavishing gifts and money on him? (Assuming they aren’t or it just hasn’t been discovered yet.)
It’s an open question which one of them is more valuable to the neo-fascists. Thomas, taciturn, doesn’t say much and seems to keep to himself. Ginni does all the PR work. Alito, on the other hand, is out there whining constantly about his victimization and how horrible the Left is. But when it comes to voting, they’re both front and center supporting the worst impulses in this country.
prostratedragon
@zhena gogolia: That the bad tax cuts and other bad laws that bad Presidents of the past have left us were at least reversible by concrete actions, but TFG has unleashed poisons into the polity that is hard simply to undo, which by implication makes him a far more profound menace.
Roger Moore
@Scout211:
Is there any valid reason for a federal appeal of a NY state matter?
Roger Moore
@Gvg:
As I understand it, he followed the reporting requirement until the LA Times started publicizing what was in those reports. Then he
decidedwas advised by unspecified people that he didn’t have to report that stuff after all. To me, that’s the real kicker. If he had been consistent all along in not reporting his corrupt receipts, he might possibly claim he honestly believed he didn’t need to report it. Since he used to report it and then stopped after some bad publicity, it’s clear he just decided to ignore the law. I guess that’s in agreement with his rulings.Omnes Omnibus
@Josie:
Crème brûlée or GTFO!
TriassicSands
Agreed.
Not quite. His rulings often ignore the Constitution, history, and common sense. But he gets to say what the law is. So, his rulings don’t disagree with the law, they define it. And he has the last word. (For now. I expect lots of reversals some day, unless the GOP prevails in 2024.)
Omnes Omnibus
@Roger Moore: It was tried in Federal court using state law. Without going into great detail, that can be done we the parties are from different states and the amount in question is above a certain threshold. The appeal will apply state law as well.
The Kropenhagen Interpretation
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): Also delicious, especially if you like vanilla.
sdhays
@TriassicSands: You’re right that these are rewards, but read the article BlueGuitarist posted from Kay. It’s ALSO bribery. He has changed his votes to align with his sugar daddy.
TriassicSands
@Omnes Omnibus:
And a theoretical future Court will not have the luxury of being “careful,” precisely because of this Court.
The Roberts Court is racking up a monster list of decisions that need to be overturned. Yes, that will probably create some grumbling in the future, but corporations are not people (with more rights and fewer responsibilities than actual citizens); many states are racist and need to have restrictions put on them concerning the right to vote; the Second Amendment does not confer a personal right to firearms ownership; women must have a constitutional right to abortion and sound reproductive health care; and so on.
It may take many years for the SCOTUS to shed it’s theocrats and neo-fascists. Each year one of their horrendous decisions stands, theoretically means even more caution must be used before reversing an increasingly long-standing decision. However, the age of a decision has nothing to do with its correctness. It took a long time for Plessy v. Ferguson and Dred Scott to be overturned. Every year they were in force meant a greater stain on this country.
Ideally, the American electorate would suddenly wake up and begin rejecting Republicans. The Court could be expanded (and Appellate districts added), D.C. would be granted statehood, and all of these decisions could be reversed before gaining more longevity. But that isn’t going to happen any time soon. If it ever does happen, the Court should be flooded with cases testing the validity of decisions made by the Roberts Court.
Adding to the problem is the reality that though the Court’s makeup is technically legal, it is not legitimate. Gorsuch should not be on the Court and neither, by the same standard should Barrett. Kavanaugh, personally and professionally, is the least legitimate of all, because he made it perfectly clear in his hearing that he is devoid of “judicial temperament,” the most basic requirement for any judge. Sadly, that determination depended on the integrity of the voting senators and they are free to ignore necessary qualifications and vote solely based on partisanship. (In that respect, I would expect much the same of Democrats were a Democratic president ever to nominate someone like Kavanaugh. That, however, is unlikely, to say the least.)
Josie
@Omnes Omnibus:
You might have a point.
TriassicSands
@sdhays:
I realize that, but I still would call them rewards. Thomas’ value is his reliability. He can be counted on to deliver. His judicial philosophy is designed to produce whatever his preferred outcome is in any case. One would expect Originalism and/or Textualism to be rigid, but in Thomas’ hands they’re quite flexible. He ignores what he needs to ignore and makes up what he needs to invent to get to where he wants to go.
In cases where Thomas doesn’t have a personally preferred outcome, I don’t doubt that he is open to changing his opinion. At this point, Thomas is probably addicted to the gifts and cash. He’s been getting them for so long that giving them up would be very unpleasant — and he “deserves” them. Plus, if he has no personal preference, then what helps his friends and hurts his enemies is what matters.
Well, there’s no way Thomas was going to cross Ginni. And I don’t think it would require a gift (bribe) to get Thomas to change his vote to please his benefactors.
In 2005, the president was Bush. A decade later, Obama had been president for years and HRC was his likely successor. Thomas’ hostility toward Democrats is considerable (unlimited). So, did he change his position because his wife got $120,000 or because Democrats seemed to be dominating the executive branch? I’d come down on the side of the latter, but accept that the addict getting a little more of his drug didn’t hurt and don’t forget Ginni.
Of course, it doesn’t really matter whether they are bribes or rewards — either is still a sure sign of his corruption.
Glory b
@Gvg: There reporting requirements are much more universal. All elected and most mid level and above government employees have to submit the same type of annual financial disclosures. I do and so does my husband, who is the regional director of a state agency.
THOUSANDS of local, state & federal employees submit these every year. Failing to do so is a dischargeable offense. To say a Supreme Court Justice could not figure this out is beyond an insult to our intelligence.
I can’t figure out why reporting on this subject doesn’t mention that.
karen marie
@Mallard Filmore: No, it just magically goes “poof .”
“What gift are you talking about,” says poor, unfairly maligned Crow. “I don’t remember any gift,” says the equally unfortunate Clarence Thomas.
And everybody lives happily ever after.
Don’t dare say anything different. Incivility (unlike bribery) will not be tolerated!
karen marie
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): Always small tapioca rather than large, and maraschino cherries are mandatory. Whipped cream is recommended but not mandatory.
@Elizabelle: Bite your tongue! Yow! It’s so easy to make. If I were in charge, it would be a criminal offense to buy commercial already-made tapioca (or any pudding).
@Josie: FLAN IS SO EASY. MAKE FLAN.
WaterGirl
@karen marie: I am not a food snob about a lot of things, at least I don’t think I am, but store-bought pudding. That’s criminal!
Also, I saw “pudding is shelf stable” and I did a double take. Pudding is only shelf stable if you put a bunch of crap in it to make it so. shudder
crimson pimpernel
@RSA: I don’t know if Thomas cares about respect from the general public as long as he doesn’t have to interact beyond his circle.
Thomas’s corruption has so far been the most visible, but it goes well beyond him. People have said that Roberts is an institutionalist and cares about the reputation of the court with his name on it. I don’t know if that’s true either, but I have been trying to highlight the Gilded-Age level of corruption by referring to them as The Roberts Barons.
glc
This post is item #3 at braddelong.substack.com/p/briefly-noted-for-2023-05-13-sa
An unexpected citation. Must have been making the rounds.