More evidence for the need of an ethics board to govern the SC.

“Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable,” Thomas said in the statement. “I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines.”

But seven legal ethics experts consulted by ProPublica, including former ethics lawyers for Congress and the White House, said the law clearly requires that gifts of transportation, including private jet flights, be disclosed. If Thomas is arguing otherwise, the experts said, he is incorrect.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/clarence-thomas-gop-megadonor-facts

 

Nothing illegal or even unethical. Just hounding a Black man of inconveniently conservative views.

 

Your uninformed opinion is noted.

But seven legal ethics experts consulted by ProPublica, including former ethics lawyers for Congress and the White House, said the law clearly requires that gifts of transportation, including private jet flights, be disclosed. If Thomas is arguing otherwise, the experts said, he is incorrect.

 

Your racist smear is noted.
Conservatives Defend Thomas Against Smear Campaign
Leah Barkoukis, TH




The left reported on a major “scandal” this week involving Clarence Thomas that conservatives are dismissing as just the latest... Read More

 

Being the SCOTUS is appointed by the president of whichever party, the SCOTUS is a political body. The difference is one faction believes in interpreting the constitution by original intent, the other faction believes in interpreting it as a living document with little regard to original intent. Based more on the political situation of today.


If the ethics violations are deemed serious enough, the constitution gives congress the power to impeach and remove any SCOTUS justice. Although in today’s modern political era of polarization, the great divide, the super, mega, ultra-high partisanship, that isn’t going to happen. Both sides want justices on the SCOTUS that agree with them politically, neither side is about to remove one of their own.


What would an ethics board accomplish? The board would have no power to remove or to impose any punishment. There is a separation of power written into the constitution, co-equal branches. The board would either be appointed by the president or by congress, which would violate the separation of power carefully designed by the framers. Even if passed and signed into law by the president, I’m sure the SCOTUS would rule it unconstitutional.

 

You don't typically stoop to such an inane level, Jack. But then your uninformed opinion is indefensible, so..........

 

One faction uses a faux fealty to originalism as a pretense to make rulings based on their political/religious beliefs.

 

I'm with Senator Scott.
Scott Condemns Left's Attacks on Conservative Minorities

Senate.gov
https://www.scott.senate.gov › press-releases › scott-co...


Jun 30, 2022 — WASHINGTON – In an appearance on Jesse Watters Primetime, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) condemned the Left's attacks against Justice ...

On why the Left attacks Black conservatives … “I certainly think that the greatest threat to the liberal coalition are Black conservatives who stand up and think for ourselves. We represent the fact that the African American community is not a monolithic community. If you can ever break the stronghold that the Democrats have on the African American community, the entire coalition falls apart.

“And think about this, Jesse: President Biden’s approval ratings have never been lower in the African American community and the Hispanic community. The last thing [the Left wants] to see are people like Clarence Thomas, Ben Carson, and myself standing up and making common sense popular everywhere in the nation. And oh, by the way, we happen to be Black. That is a great threat to the entire coalition on the Left. So they want to shut it down, cancel Clarence Thomas because he dares to think for himself.”

On Justice Thomas’ character … “You think about what Justice Sotomayor said about Justice Thomas. She said he was kind, affable, first to celebrate the victories in your life — whether it’s your child’s birthday — he is such a warm-hearted person. Those were her comments, but the Clarence Thomas I have met is consistent with what she said. This is a person who rose from abject poverty in rural Georgia to live the American Dream because in America, all things are possible. Clarence Thomas is a person who has affection for everyone, even those who disagree with him, because he understands that you can disagree without being disagreeable. Clarence Thomas is a class act.”

 

What the reactions to Clarence Thomas post-Roe reveal ...

NBC News
https://www.nbcnews.com › think › opinion › suprem...


Jul 1, 2022 — Supreme Court Roe v Wade opinion sparks racist attacks on Clarence Thomas, confirming his world view.

 

What is racist about noting his unethical acceptance of unreported vacations worth hundreds of thousands of dollars from a conservative activist? You are uncharacteristically flailing about.

 

Because there's nothing unethical about accepting personal hospitality, nor is there a reporting requirement. This is a fake issue created to attack a Black man.

 

A Brown University professor has penned an open letter denouncing the attacks on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
Saying that “white progressives do not have the moral authority to excommunicate a black man from his race because they disagree with them,” Brown’s Glenn Loury, a professor of economics, was joined by Robert Woodson Sr. and over a hundred signatories on the missive published to Real Clear Politics on Wednesday. . . .

“Regardless of where one stands on Justice Thomas’ personal or legal opinions, he is among the pantheon of black trailblazers throughout American history and is a model of integrity, scholarship, steadfastness, resilience, and commitment to the Constitution of the United States of America,” wrote Loury and the signatories in their open letter. “For three decades Justice Thomas has served as a model for our children. He has long been honored and celebrated by black people in this country and his attackers do not speak for the majority of blacks.”


Brown University Professor Denounces “Racist, Vicious ...

GoLocalProv
https://www.golocalprov.com › news › brown-univers...


Jul 14, 2022 — Saying that “white progressives do not have the moral authority to excommunicate a black man from his race because they disagree with them,” ...

 

You mean other than it violates ethics rules for every federal judge?

 

There are more issues involved and you damn well know it. Oooof, talk about a red herring. Leftists just wanting to keep a Black man Down? Jesus F Christ Jack....

 

Thomas:
“Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable.”

Severino:
"This is just grasping at straws by the left that is desperate to tear down Justice Thomas because he now has a working originalist majority on the court," said Roger Severino, vice president of domestic policy and The Joseph C. and Elizabeth A. Anderlik Fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

"This is politics. Plain and simple."

AP News
Justice Thomas says he didn't have to disclose luxury trips

The Washington Post
Justice Clarence Thomas says he was told trips didn't need disclosure


Justice Clarence Thomas says trips with billionaire didn't need to be disclosed at the time


Report on Clarence Thomas' travel habits is 'politics plain and simple': expert

 

There is no ethical or legal issue. So what's left?

 

Regardless of what's left, you know damn well the flack coming at him is not due to him being black. He seems a bit of an Uncle Tom the way he leans in to take the side of typically waspish conservative causes, so I suppose there is some impetus based on him being black behind the ridicule. Wait, I've thought myself into a loop on this. Nevermind, carry on.

One thing though, what will your reaction be should this court support any independent state legislatures that decide they have the authority to supersede their state's general election results for the Presidency in 2024 and force their state's electoral votes to their preference?

 

I don't think the SCOTUS would ever do that. In the hypothetical, I would oppose any such action.

 

Were you surprised by Dobbs?

 

Not at all. Pro-Life activists worked for fifty years for that result. Pro-Choice activists never backstopped Roe with legislation.

 

Kelo v. New London is an interesting case that proves truth is stranger than fiction. The left side of the court actually supported the developer in this case. Bizarre. Thomas and the right were actually right. It's a bit of a quagmire making any attempt to sort DC out.

 

Indeed.
Despotism in New London

Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com › 2004/09/19 › desp...


Sep 19, 2004 — By George F. Will ... Such carving is occurring in Connecticut. ... the life-shattering power wielded by the government of New London, Conn.

 

Yeah, a valid point about the lack of backstopping the case. @Talon created a great thread about his take on the issue. Happy Easter btw T, since I've mentioned you. It is exceedingly painful that there is no balance with dudes like Graham and McConnell not to mention McCarthy, Jordan and dipshit Comer falling in line behind Trump. Trump belongs in Florence ADX Supermax for his attempt to overthrow the government of the United States using the full force and power of the Presidency to do so.

 

I would not include McConnell with the others. My take is that he used Trump, not the other way around.
And Happy Easter to you, as well.

 

The other side does the same basing their decisions on their political ideology. Neither intreprets the Constitution as it is written in plain English. Way too much lawyerese going on.