All 9 Supreme Court justices push back on oversight

'Raises more questions,' Senate chair says

In my opinion that means that all the judges have done things they know will be called into question.

The building needs a flush handle.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/9-s...-push-back-oversight-raises/story?id=98917921

 

It's like Government when it has put a new tax in place. Once it's there, it never gonna take it back. These prima donna ivory tower politically and personally obligated pedestal sitting bastards have had it all on easy street, and they ain't gonna start putting impediments to the gravy train their own way now, are they? Gee, that would be the honourable thing to do and self interest always trumps honour, yes?

Any Justice with nothing to fear would have no issue with the imposition of accountability, just as Justices Down Here DO have accountability.

This is just another sucky part of that waaaaay outmoded, waaaaay passed use by date Constitution the USA has.

 

Anyone, anytime and anywhere who opposes accountability and oversight IS corrupt.
If justice is to be had from the highest court in the land, a total reform of the court must take place.

 

I think we can look at other systems in other countries to see that the court of the land is exempt from judicial reform.

Take Israel, for example. They have tried and failed to reform the court.

It looks like the court is king and queen of its own domain. They get the final say on ethics rules and any other legal thing. And how it applies to them, or doesn't apply to them.

 

Not necessarily. I think it is human nature to push back on something like this. I can guarantee you that Senate chair person would push back against more oversight of his group.

Consider how you would feel if corporate HQ pushed out more oversight for your job. It doesn't necessarily mean you are doing something wrong. Often oversight means more process, more red tape, making simple task much more difficult and time consuming.

 

Considering one of them got away with getting lavish presents every year for a bunch of decades, who are financially out of reach of most Americans, basically being flat out bribed all that time.... it does mean the oversight was WAY to weak. And they got crap to hide if they refuse to comply when the cesspit is being opened up.

 

Only when the humans are corrupt.

Not always and not necessarily, but more importantly that is why mechanisms can be put in place that can negate almost entirely the possibility of ethical violations at least when it comes to influencing the court.

 

Nonsense. If one is willing to give their partisan lenses a rest, they’ll see that what they are saying has merit. If the Democrats had a majority in the SC they wouldn’t be crying about a lack of oversight.

 

The projection is strong

The justices work for the people. They should be held to the highest standards possible. It’s disgusting y’all are saying na— they should be able to do whatever they want without repercussions.

 

It is what I said it is. I'm sorry that your attempt to shame me with the usual tactics won't work.

As to your bolded statement. Show your work or retreat now.

Never mind, I'm raising it now.

 

You should try new arguments then if you have to raise it so often. As to me proving my points, have you been paying attention to current events?

We have two justices being paid off, one’s wife has been receiving money from a hyper partisan lobbying organization and wanted to bypass the will of the voters in a national election.

Maybe you believe the above is acceptable?

 

So you have no work to show that proves what you wrote here, reposted below.

cd8ed said: ↑
It’s disgusting y’all are saying na— they should be able to do whatever they want without repercussions

Just as I suspected. You have nothing, nadda, runnin' on empty, zilch.



And in closing,

 

Waive it higher for the people in back while you ignore the multiple cases that you would be fauxraged about if it was a liberal.

It’s so cute you believe waiving the white flag means it applies to anyone other than yourself.

 

That you mention "Democrats" just highlights the politics of all this.

Tell me why Justices should not be accountable to some authority, beyond themselves, please.

 

They have something to hide.

It's just reality.

 

No, it doesn't. Anyone who resists ethical standards has something to hide. In this case I'm being bipartisan, as all the "justices" are against it.

 

Your team member, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, DEMOCRAT,
IS ALL BEHIND THIS PARTISAN MANEUVER.

 

We have coequal branches of government.

If we're going to have an ethics board watching over the Supreme Court, the same board can watch over Congress. What could go wrong?

And stop acting like there's no political corruption in Australia.

 

Would love to see your evidence of judges being paid off.


more probable

 

Why aren't the Liberal justices headed in up to Capital Hill to testify, under oath?

 

Because they have something to hide as well.

 

I have no 'team leader.' Please answer my question:

Tell me why Justices should not be accountable to some authority, beyond themselves, please.

 

You, "The People" watch over Congress. Those In Congress are ultimate accountable to the Voters.

So...to whom are Justices of SCOTUS accountable?

Let's stick to this Topic, eh? I don't want Staff deleting my posts as being Off Topic.

 

It has to do with their belief in the separation of powers and putting politics into Constitutional law issues before the Supreme Court by oversight. It is a very slippery slope. the only time the House and Senate should get involved is through the impeachment process of said justice on the Supreme Court if they violated the law.

However, I do think Chief Roberts needs to set forth some guidelines for the justices in the court to minimize any and all improprieties and conflicts of interest. Nothing says that better than the news about Justice Thomas and his luxurious vacations paid for by a rich megadonor that may appear conflict and ethical issues.

 

The fuderal kangaroos in the black robes are kings, don't you understand ? They're the ones that actually make the laws and so far as they read the Constitution and instead of simply reading it they interpret it and their word becomes law.

Of course they don't want anyone looking over their shoulders