SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,180
|
Post by SSHoya on Jun 13, 2024 16:06:30 GMT -5
Alito worries leaked remarks will undermine hard-won vindictive image WASHINGTON — In the hours after Samuel A. Alito Jr. learned that secretly captured recordings of a private conversation were going to be made public, the Supreme Court justice was frantic, close associates say, worrying the tapes would undermine the image he has worked to create of exactly what kind of judge he is. But when publication revealed the comments to be merely an endorsement of the need “to return our country to a place of godliness,” that worry gave way to relief. “That could have been so much worse,” Alito said in a subsequent interview. “What if I’d said something temperate or reasonable?” www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/06/13/alito-secret-recording-reputation-satire/
|
|
hoyajinx
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,585
|
Post by hoyajinx on Jun 13, 2024 16:53:26 GMT -5
Turns out there were more trips that Thomas failed to disclose. In not disclosing these when he absolutely knew he should have disclosed them on his amended filings, he probably thought he could get away with it because they hadn’t been uncovered. He’s completely dishonest; I don’t know how there is any way to believe that someone this dishonest, and possibly corrupt, is making decisions based solely on law and not other influences. The Supreme Court has lost credibility. Something drastic needs to be done to rein in these political agents of unparalleled power and no accountability. www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-jet-flights-senate-investigation-scotus
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,180
|
Post by SSHoya on Jun 13, 2024 17:01:33 GMT -5
Turns out there were more trips that Thomas failed to disclose. In not disclosing these when he absolutely knew he should have disclosed them on his amended filings, he probably thought he could get away with it because they hadn’t been uncovered. He’s completely dishonest; I don’t know how there is any way to believe that someone this dishonest, and possibly corrupt, is making decisions based solely on law and not other influences. The Supreme Court has lost credibility. Something drastic needs to be done to reign in these political agents of unparalleled power and no accountability. www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-jet-flights-senate-investigation-scotusI know two attorneys (both Black, one now a law professor and the other retired Asst GC at NSA, neither of whom I'd define as liberal) who went to Yale Law School with him. Said he was a "phony" back then. Probably a liar as well since being a "phony" probably includes being a liar.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,443
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jun 13, 2024 18:41:11 GMT -5
Turns out there were more trips that Thomas failed to disclose. In not disclosing these when he absolutely knew he should have disclosed them on his amended filings, he probably thought he could get away with it because they hadn’t been uncovered. He’s completely dishonest; I don’t know how there is any way to believe that someone this dishonest, and possibly corrupt, is making decisions based solely on law and not other influences. The Supreme Court has lost credibility. Something drastic needs to be done to reign in these political agents of unparalleled power and no accountability. www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-jet-flights-senate-investigation-scotusI know two attorneys (both Black, one now a law professor and the other retired Asst GC at NSA, neither of whom I'd define as liberal) who went to Yale Law School with him. Said he was a "phony" back then. Probably a liar as well since being a "phony" probably includes being a liar. GHWB's ongoing legacy. The Senate should have listened to Anita Hill, but of course the Republicans wouldn't hear of it.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,861
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 13, 2024 19:29:16 GMT -5
GHWB's ongoing legacy. The Senate should have listened to Anita Hill, but of course the Republicans wouldn't hear of it. George Bush's legacy are three events: 1. The end of the Cold War, without a shot fired or a missile launched. 2. The invasion of Kuwait; and 3. His most significant legislative effort, The Americans with Disabilities Act, which he supported against the wishes of his own party.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,180
|
Post by SSHoya on Jun 14, 2024 9:29:23 GMT -5
|
|
Massholya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,014
|
Post by Massholya on Jun 14, 2024 11:38:56 GMT -5
6-3. Hopefully people will realize that sitting out presidential elections has real consequences. If you value your children’s lives, you simply cannot allow another republican to occupy the Oval Office till all these quacks have expired their stupid lifetime appointments. Our children are being killed because a small portion of society values their guns and NRA donations more that they value life. Might as well declare speeding and drunk driving laws “unconstitutional” while you’re at it. Abortion would probably still be legal too if it required a gun to perform the procedure.
|
|
hoyajinx
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,585
|
Post by hoyajinx on Jun 14, 2024 15:48:59 GMT -5
6-3. Hopefully people will realize that sitting out presidential elections has real consequences. If you value your children’s lives, you simply cannot allow another republican to occupy the Oval Office till all these quacks have expired their stupid lifetime appointments. Our children are being killed because a small portion of society values their guns and NRA donations more that they value life. Might as well declare speeding and drunk driving laws “unconstitutional” while you’re at it. Abortion would probably still be legal too if it required a gun to perform the procedure. Except people don’t realize it. We seem doomed to repeat the mistakes of 2016 where the petulant “Never Hillary” crowd paved the way for Trump. We could have avoided these SCOTUS decisions but for the tremendously short-sighted thinking of those voters. Now, the “punish Biden for Gaza” crowd is set to do the same thing. Ultimately, they will be punishing Gaza (along with this country) far worse by allowing Trump to be elected again. This is aside from the fact that more SCOTUS seats will likely be in play, making it all but assured that there is a corrupt Republican stranglehold on the court for decades. I hate what’s going on in Gaza, but it’s far better for Palestine in the long run to have Biden as president than the leader of the radical Islamophobic party. Again, it’s petulance disguised as taking the moral high ground. When you have essentially a binary choice, ensuring that the lesser of two evils is the ultimate outcome IS the moral high ground.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,443
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jun 14, 2024 18:23:36 GMT -5
GHWB's ongoing legacy. The Senate should have listened to Anita Hill, but of course the Republicans wouldn't hear of it. George Bush's legacy are three events: 1. The end of the Cold War, without a shot fired or a missile launched. 2. The invasion of Kuwait; and 3. His most significant legislative effort, The Americans with Disabilities Act, which he supported against the wishes of his own party. I will give him credit for number 3, which is now engrained as part of our society (just waiting, though, to hear Thomas and Alito questioning its constitutionality). Tell me, though, when was there a worse appointment to the Supreme Court? I'm hard pressed to think of one during my lifetime, anyway, and I'm 73.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,575
Member is Online
|
Post by tashoya on Jun 14, 2024 19:01:42 GMT -5
I will give him credit for number 3, which is now engrained as part of our society (just waiting, though, to hear Thomas and Alito questioning its constitutionality). Tell me, though, when was there a worse appointment to the Supreme Court? I'm hard pressed to think of one during my lifetime, anyway, and I'm 73. Some perspective: the Thomas nomination followed significant Republican outcry in 1990 when Bush passed on Thomas as inexperienced and nominated David Souter instead to replace Justice Brennan; Souter was confirmed 90-9 but was immediately seen as less conservative than either Democrats or Republicans had expected. When Justice Marshall's seat came up in 1991, there was pressure on Bush to nominate Thomas, both to maintain a black jurist as well as to select a predictably conservative justice, the same predictability that Souter was not. Worst appointments? Justice James McReynolds and Chief Justice Roger Taney, the author of the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision, are often on these lists. Abe Fortas and his forced withdrawal from the court is likely a dishonorable mention as well. www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/supreme-court/who-are-the-worst-supreme-court-justices-of-all-time/Some more perspective: Justice Thomas is demonstrably unethical and, thus, compromised to be kind. He deserves to be booted.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 32,091
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jun 15, 2024 11:01:38 GMT -5
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,443
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jun 15, 2024 18:41:41 GMT -5
For some reason DFW's response to my post doesn't seem to appear (deleted?). In any case:
1. McReynolds is likely the worst, but he was way before my time. I did say during my lifetime. 2. The Dred Scott decision was clearly awful, but does that make Roger B. Taney one of the worst justices? What about the others that supported that decision? 3. I would like to see Abe Fortas's transgressions listed alongside Thomas's. This is purely a guess, but I wouldn't be surprised if Thomas's were way, way worse. Kind of like comparing Nixon to Trump.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,861
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 15, 2024 19:13:16 GMT -5
For some reason DFW's response to my post doesn't seem to appear (deleted?). In any case: 1. McReynolds is likely the worst, but he was way before my time. I did say during my lifetime. 2. The Dred Scott decision was clearly awful, but does that make Roger B. Taney one of the worst justices? What about the others that supported that decision? 3. I would like to see Abe Fortas's transgressions listed alongside Thomas's. This is purely a guess, but I wouldn't be surprised if Thomas's were way, way worse. Kind of like comparing Nixon to Trump. I edited the post and accidentally deleted it. It's still cited in the quote above. 2. Taney gets the lion share of scorn for Dred Scott for writing the majority opinion, which largely skipped over the issue in the case (whether a slave that moved to Illinois was no longer a slave) and 1) held that no African-Americans were ever intended to be citizens of any state, thus nullifying citizenship nationwide, 2) holding the Compromise of 1820 as unconstitutional and 3) held that the government could not ban slavery anywhere, which escalated the issues leading to the Civil War. It was a significant effort of malpractice and judicial overstep for an 80 year old jurist who had been on the court for 21 years, not to mention ignoring the issues of the original case. The case was decided 7-2 but it's the name of the author of the opinion who is remembered. 3. Abe Fortas was accused of "as a sitting justice, he regularly attended White House staff meetings; he briefed [LBJ] on secret Court deliberations; and, on behalf of the president, he pressured senators who opposed the war in Vietnam," was paid $15,000 by a K Street law firm to teach summer school at American University (an amount representing 40% of the justice's salary), and took $20,000 from a millionaire indicted (and later convicted) of securities fraud to intervene on his behalf with the SEC. The Washington Post further reported that "Fortas persuaded Wolfson not to release 11 pages of correspondence between the two, including letters about the SEC case and a letter in which Wolfson sought Fortas' assistance in obtaining a presidential pardon." The problem in our tribal society today is that if Justice Thomas was involved in a scandal involving excess benefits anytime before 2009 or so, legal and public opinion would have swiftly driven him off the bench. The parties are now so polarized that no one is leaving any office nor will be punished at all, lest it be considered a victory for the other party. The only exit paths for Thomas are resignation or impeachment, and that avenue is neutered by the lack of voting across party lines. And, in a world where politicians of both parties will hang on into their 80s and 90s to stay in Congress, justices aren't leaving either; the stubbornness of Ruth Bader Ginsburg not to leave in 2015 has effects that last to this day. At 75, Thomas has been on the court 32 years, more than all but ten justices in the history of the court. He is four years from William O. Douglas' record of 36 years in the seat (1939-1975). Fortas' hasty resignation is largely forgotten today, given how much else was going on at the time. Newly elected President Nixon didn't much care for an LBJ appointee to become his chief justice, and relied on a recommendation from his assistant attorney general not to support Fortas in his confirmation, which opened the door for his nomination of Warren Burger, who was swiftly confirmed. When John Marshall Harlan II retired two years later (yes, justices actually retired in those days), Nixon put forth the name of that 48 year old assistant attorney general to the open seat. His name was William Rehnquist.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,443
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jun 17, 2024 3:44:16 GMT -5
For some reason DFW's response to my post doesn't seem to appear (deleted?). In any case: 1. McReynolds is likely the worst, but he was way before my time. I did say during my lifetime. 2. The Dred Scott decision was clearly awful, but does that make Roger B. Taney one of the worst justices? What about the others that supported that decision? 3. I would like to see Abe Fortas's transgressions listed alongside Thomas's. This is purely a guess, but I wouldn't be surprised if Thomas's were way, way worse. Kind of like comparing Nixon to Trump. I edited the post and accidentally deleted it. It's still cited in the quote above. 2. Taney gets the lion share of scorn for Dred Scott for writing the majority opinion, which largely skipped over the issue in the case (whether a slave that moved to Illinois was no longer a slave) and 1) held that no African-Americans were ever intended to be citizens of any state, thus nullifying citizenship nationwide, 2) holding the Compromise of 1820 as unconstitutional and 3) held that the government could not ban slavery anywhere, which escalated the issues leading to the Civil War. It was a significant effort of malpractice and judicial overstep for an 80 year old jurist who had been on the court for 21 years, not to mention ignoring the issues of the original case. The case was decided 7-2 but it's the name of the author of the opinion who is remembered. 3. Abe Fortas was accused of "as a sitting justice, he regularly attended White House staff meetings; he briefed [LBJ] on secret Court deliberations; and, on behalf of the president, he pressured senators who opposed the war in Vietnam," was paid $15,000 by a K Street law firm to teach summer school at American University (an amount representing 40% of the justice's salary), and took $20,000 from a millionaire indicted (and later convicted) of securities fraud to intervene on his behalf with the SEC. The Washington Post further reported that "Fortas persuaded Wolfson not to release 11 pages of correspondence between the two, including letters about the SEC case and a letter in which Wolfson sought Fortas' assistance in obtaining a presidential pardon." The problem in our tribal society today is that if Justice Thomas was involved in a scandal involving excess benefits anytime before 2009 or so, legal and public opinion would have swiftly driven him off the bench. The parties are now so polarized that no one is leaving any office nor will be punished at all, lest it be considered a victory for the other party. The only exit paths for Thomas are resignation or impeachment, and that avenue is neutered by the lack of voting across party lines. And, in a world where politicians of both parties will hang on into their 80s and 90s to stay in Congress, justices aren't leaving either; the stubbornness of Ruth Bader Ginsburg not to leave in 2015 has effects that last to this day. At 75, Thomas has been on the court 32 years, more than all but ten justices in the history of the court. He is four years from William O. Douglas' record of 36 years in the seat (1939-1975). Fortas' hasty resignation is largely forgotten today, given how much else was going on at the time. Newly elected President Nixon didn't much care for an LBJ appointee to become his chief justice, and relied on a recommendation from his assistant attorney general not to support Fortas in his confirmation, which opened the door for his nomination of Warren Burger, who was swiftly confirmed. When John Marshall Harlan II retired two years later (yes, justices actually retired in those days), Nixon put forth the name of that 48 year old assistant attorney general to the open seat. His name was William Rehnquist. You mean Renchberg? Also in this mix were Clement Haynsworth, who should probably never have been rejected and Harold Carswell, a different story altogether, and then we got Harry Blackmun. Lewis Powell (whom my former boss clerked for, and who he adored) was also appointed prior to Rehnquist. Anyway, thanks for the historical data. Fortas clearly crossed some forbidden lines, but I still stand by my position (although clearly, Thomas isn't going anywhere, sadly). And it still seems to me that blaming Taney for Dred Scott is like blaming John Roberts for Dobbs.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,575
Member is Online
|
Post by tashoya on Jun 18, 2024 12:43:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bicentennial on Jun 19, 2024 10:05:03 GMT -5
Its June 19th and the Supreme Court has 23 decisions yet to publish this term.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,443
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jun 19, 2024 20:02:18 GMT -5
if they had their druthers, they would probably push the immunity decision to the middle of August.
|
|
|
Post by bicentennial on Jun 20, 2024 15:22:05 GMT -5
Its June 20th and looks like it is down to 20 cases although 4 were decided today so my count could be off one.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 32,091
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jun 21, 2024 3:05:16 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 32,091
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jun 21, 2024 3:13:32 GMT -5
|
|