Corruption in the SCOTUS

Don’t know anyone named Fanni on the SCOTUS.

 

Cons.... when deflection doesn't work, go with obfuscation.

 

What would? Letting the state of Colorado CHARGE a former President with Insurrection... and then try him in absentia... find him guilty... and try to keep him off the state's presidential election ballot? Yeah, that sounds like due process to me. My argument should supersede in that patchwork nonsense.

 

Nothing wrong with Thomas taking trips with his friend Harlan Crow, who has no business before the Court.

Thomas sold his residence in Georgia to Crow at a loss. Thomas was going to put the home on the market but Crow wanted to turn it into a museum. Again, this was perfectly okay.

There is a Democrat Justice on the Supreme Court who has taken many summer trips to a fancy home of a lawyer who has business before the Court. Democrats have no problem with that.

Former SCOTIS law clerk Mike R. Davis

 

Corruption in the SCOTUS... they unanimously didn't think the state of Colorado had the right to dictate who can and cannot run for President of The United States.

 

States rights when it helps republicans, federal rights when it doesn't.

 

A voice in the wilderness, crying out against the viciousness, just wanting to be out in his $267,000 RV paid for by one his close friends

 

Nah, it's not a state's right to deny a national presidential nominee of one of the two main political Partys to be put on a national ballot for president.

The Cro-Magnon leftists would be flipping out of the tables were turned.

 

Stop being so mean to Clarence. You're going to force him to take another free vacation with the Nazi memorabilia guy to get away from all the nastiness.

 

Maybe not corruption but ideological extremism. I don't have a subscription to the New York Times I can't read this. But a friend passed it on. Apparently Justice Alito flew an upside down flag before Biden's inauguration

At Justice Alito’s House, a ‘Stop the Steal’ Symbol on Display

 

Totally impartial - just calling balls and strikes. Right Mr Alito

 

in a just system, ALito and Thomas would both be required to recuse themselves. Has our government been hijacked via the supreme court?

the system of checks and balances has broken down, that was obvious from the two impeachments where djt was guilty both times. and now we have a senate unwilling to look at the most obvious cases of bias I can recall on the top bench

 

What I find so deeply offensive about Alito's actions is not just that it marks him as being at one far end of the ideological spectrum as a justice. Certainly plenty of justices in the past have been far to one side of the other. It's that he would express that extremity by adopting a belief about the election which is so empirically false that no reasonable person should adopt it. It points to what a bubble he exists in getting his news each day. He is known for routinely citing so-called points at oral argument that none of the parties have argued because they realize they are not supported and fact or law, but which are recited on Fox as true.

But more than that, it's just the sheer arrogance of being so public, in not even trying to maintain a pretense of equal justice under law, not showing any self-restraint that would be necessary to engender public confidence in the court as an institution, for the betterment of the nation.

 

no problem, it is his wife's fault.

Alito, Thomas, Menendez...all putting the blame on their wife..smdh..maybe that's why Melania is hiding, surprised djt hasn't blamed her yet

Supreme Court Justice Blames Wife as New Scandal Casts Shadow on Trump Case (msn.com)

 

Only scanned through this page and didn't go back through the prior 25 pages, so I hope this isn't repetitive.

Putting aside the conspiracy stories about Justice X that absolutely prove bias - let's look at the historical votes, namely votes on the important divided opinions (5-4, 6-3). People can do their own homework, but I assert that over the last 5 decades the Republican-appointed justice(s) have "crossed party lines" (see, O'connor, Kennedy, Roberts, etc.) whereas the Democrat-appointed justices have not. One might say this proves the "left" view/opinion is correct and these Republican Justices had to accede. One might say this proves the Republican Justices are more likely than Democrat Justices to rule on the law and not on bias or politics. I find that a much more interesting and productive discussion than X has a biased wife or someone says they saw a flag in their yard. Note that Scalia and Ginsburg were very close friends who vacationed and socialized together for decades. Are all their opinions suspect now? Maybe there are legitimate positions on the law where disagreements exist. Makes one wish members of Congress and particularly in the media could appreciate that without devolving into ad hominem.

 

Minority factions are always more disciplined in any setup, if you reverse the make up of the court, the majority is always going to be more divided based on voting totals, because their opinions are going to have the force of law, and minority justices might offer "legitimacy" votes in exchange for less broad ruling on a case. I'm not sure this is a useful way of looking at it TBH, if you are only going to look at a period when the conservatives have held a majority. A disciplined majority will always seek buy-in so as to gain legitimacy and make a ruling more likely to stand over time, whereas a disciplined minority will seek discipline its members to extract concessions. On certain things, like say Roe, there are no possible concessions and the majority will just rule. (But it seems like there was some possible worry of flaking in the center which caused the right-most faction to leak their ruling). Hence my point about the minority faction always being more disciplined. That's how it works.

 

Judges are supposed to be concerned not only with conflicts or improprieties but also the appearance of them. Alito doesn't seem to deny that he knew the American flag on his property was positioned to convey distress but wants us to believe his wife wears the wants in that family. Okay. Alito remains my least favorite justice, and it's not a close competition.

 

Honestly the most disturbing thing about this is mostly the revelation that he's just a Fox News grandpa, I suppose that was pretty evident from the voting and written opinions, but basically living your life like a red-pilled suburban dentist is pretty unbecoming of someone with that kind of power. The revelation that the highest court has guys who inhale the same media as your racist uncle at Thanksgiving shatters a lot of mythology about the court, like the 'good old days' of Scalia and Ginsburg going to the opera. That was the one good thing about the court being full of geezers, they weren't hyper-online or totally cable media-pilled. Those days are probably over. I feel like if we are going to have a high court with life-appointments they should live as monks or something.

 

Biden is reportedly under-performing Democratic Senate candidates in the polls. If Trump were to win back the White House but Democrats were to control the Senate, is there any reason Democrats could not simply refuse to consider any nominees until the next election? Many on the left were frustrated with RGB for staying on too long, and notably Thomas and Alito are both in their 70s.

 

Only the gop can do that. Did you not get the memo?