SCOTUS - US Supreme Court (and other court stuff)

Yeah. His wife is a real nut job. She's like a Mike Lindell with a sex change. Even with a previous life excursion into cultism she's unable to muster the self examination to realize she's in another cult !

If you don't have the capacity stop and look at yourself in the mirror as a regular exercise of mental health, to don't belong anywhere near these kinds of places.

 

It's clear that Thomas, at least when he was much younger, could be extremely vulgar when it came to discussing sex. Esp in front of women who didn't want to hear it. If he had any black friends (I can see him going full immersion into white society), did he boast about his "white woman" GF/wife?

If anyone thinks my comment is racist because of black male stereotyping, no, I'm making it because I've seen that behavior live & in person. I consider such behavior atypical, but Thomas seems to have that braggard personality.

 

I don't think it's racist to point out, it's definitely a thing.

But for real, A date with Anita Hill would be something to boast about big time. She's clearly intellectually engaging and I bet a great conversationalist. Let alone that she's way more attractive just to look at, though boasting about a date isn't really... I don't know, realistic as it's not exactly an achievement like a job promotion or a bonus, it's more like luck of hitting it off on personality to me.

But given that point of view Ginny isn't someone to boast about no matter how you evaluate her.

Now I would date Liz Cheney cause I feel like we could talk rationally about stuff and no hang up on ludicrous stuff like weather the world is flat or round...
I would totally date Laura Coats or Ashly Allison on CNN for everything you'd typically put on your dating scales.

What are you gonna talk to Ginny about ?
The last Walmart parking lot you camped in ?

 

That said, Ginny and Thomas are definitely two pubic hairs on a coke can, if not peas in a pod.

 

Uncle Thomas (credit J-L Cauvin) is back in the news.

Clarence Thomas Discloses Private Trips Paid By Billionaire Friend

The article mentions a Judicial Conference needing to refer this to the Justice Dept for further investigation. I'm going to check into this.


*****
On a lighter note...
Does Uncle Thomas ever spend his own money on anything? Does he go to say Macy's and just take what he wants?


*****
An example of my cluelessness...
Harlan Crow is Thomas' biggest sugar daddy. It took me a while to figure out Crow is the Crow in Trammel-Crow. At one time it seemed as though nearly every commercial real estate development in Houston was a Trammel-Crow project.

 

Governance & the Judicial Conference


You might need to forgive me for the following link. In a way it's insulting to anyone who is literate and semi-intelligent, but it's also one of the most sucint explanations of the SCOTUS I've read.

The Judicial Branch


The main thing for this post is the SCOTUS is part of the Judicial Branch, which makes it subject to the Judicial Conference.

Exactly how the Judicial Conference could establish new rules, and/or strengthen existing rules, to better control the SCOTUS isn't clear to me. It seems any action could be challenged, and possibly heard by the SCOTUS.

 

Nothing I read mentioned Judicial Conference having any direct control over SCOTUS.

It sounds as though a suggestion, only a suggestion, could be given to Roberts.

 

What's fucked up is even the "liberal" judges are pushing back against a code of ethics.
I don't think they have done anything like Thomas but I think they have developed friendships with these assholes and really don't want the boat to get tipped over.
It's the frog in the slowly boiling water thing.
They know how fucked up it is but hey, they know these people and they are all right.
Fucking liberals are the worst sometimes.

 

Agreed.

And I wonder if the dirt the justices have on each other plays a role in their unity against meaningful ethics rules.

 

As Clarence Thomas faces record unpopularity, Americans want an ethics code for the Supreme Court | CNN Politics

Code of ethics? We don't need no stinking code of ethics!

 

I'm shocked.

The SC ruling is moot in that the emails were already provided, but it's not in the sense it should prevent any future action should someone want to make another challenge.


The next portion of the article shows the SC rejected a suit claiming NPD Trump can't run for POTUS because he's excluded under 14th Adm, Sec 3.

 

Will this actually go anywhere? If the subpoenas are issued, will they hold up to legal challenges?

Senate Judiciary to schedule vote authorizing subpoenas in SCOTUS ethics investigation | CNN Politics

Possible paywall, already had issues with TWP.
Senate Democrats Plan to Subpoena Wealthy Figures Who Paid for Thomas’s and Alito’s Luxury Trips

If the SC ends up shooting down the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) subpoenas, what would that mean for SJC subpoena powers in the future?
There have been some battles during the numerous NPD Trump investigations, but I'm not sure if any clear answers have been found or established. The current MO seems to be ignore the subpoenas and see what happens (Jim Jordan never faced charges).

 

It's rare any person or body is truly isolated from at least some kind of sanction or censure.

It's interesting the SC is totally self-policing.

 

From what I'm reading and seeing a fair number (I hesitate to say many) of Repubs are now willing to (at least discuss) compromise on the strict time frame, & make allowances for certain conditions.

Amazing how a kick in the ass can get some politicians to wake up.