U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

Too funny

https://x.com/profmarkovic/status/1699601984150724878?s=46&t=QDZVA2Ds4KfmaZUAmIs9Gw

?

no way i'm clicking that

(God, I hate Elon)

Another embarrassment for the Supreme Court. Judge Smith's excellent 9th Circuit opinion warned the Court that Kennedy's lawyers had concocted a false narrative. Kennedy never had any intention of moving back from Florida to coach high school football part-time. https://t.co/QobiFONzG7

— Milan Markovic (@profmarkovic.bsky.social) (@ProfMarkovic) September 7, 2023

Heidi Pryzblya wrote for Politico a big deep dive into how Leo and Federalist Society and Ginni Thomas and other conservatives got together after Citizens United oral arguments but before decision was issued and made plans to form organizations. Article goes into detail re Ginni Thomas . Plus a fascinating anecdote about a connected right wing winning “debutante” (sp?) who will be clerking for Alito.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/10/ginni-thomas-leonard-leo-citizens-united-00108082

x-post-- seeing on twitter X a discussion of Gorsuch intentionally overlooking information that was available at hearing time on Coach Kennedy and how he didn't intend to stay in Washington state, and more data on how he handled the mid field prayers. I guess Gorsuch's law clerks didn't have the courage or interest in researching the facts for him either

Guest writer for Politico article—

The movement’s triumphs are now visible but its engine remains hidden: A billion-dollar network of groups, most of which are registered as tax-exempt charities or social welfare organizations. Taking advantage of gaps in disclosure laws, they shield the identities of most of their donors and some of the recipients of the funds. Among those who’ve been paid by the groups are leading thinkers and individuals with close personal ties to Leo — including a whopping $7 million to a group run by a close friend and his wife. They also include a for-profit business for which Leo himself is chairman and which received tens of millions of dollars from his nonprofit network.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-secretly-attended-koch-brothers-donor-events-scotus

Thomas helped raise money for Koch Brothers one of the largest political organizations in the country, who are involved with cases that come to court and then defended the right of this organization to keep its activities hidden. Clarence Thomas wrote concurring opinion in AFPF v. Bonta saying that asking a Koch dark money group to disclose its donors violates those donors’ 1A rights.

https://x.com/SimonWDC/status/1705384824054423774?s=20

Come on, his jurisprudence is so tight it's unimpeachable.

Libs just jealous they can't go here (although Ken "Koch funds my PBS films" Burns does)

Charles and David Koch’s access to Thomas has gone well beyond his participation in their donor events. For years, the brothers had opportunities to meet privately with Thomas thanks to the justice’s regular trips to the Bohemian Grove, an all-male retreat that attracts some of the nation’s most influential corporate and political figures. Thomas has been a regular at the Grove for 25 years as Harlan Crow’s guest, according to internal documents and interviews with dozens of members, other guests and workers at the retreat.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/26/us/politics/supreme-court-alabama-voting-map.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Alabama ‘s latest attempt to overrule a judge’s order and gerrymander was even too blatant for US Supreme Court. Kavanaugh had hinted in an earlier opinion he was leaning their way, but I guess he’s waiting for a more subtle opportunity

Hey, look, a Thomas recusal:

And there it is: Justice Clarence Thomas recused himself from Supreme Court decision rejecting John Eastman's request the court vacate the decision that allowed Eastman's emails to be shared with House Jan 6 Select Committee

====> pic.twitter.com/jL6RmmpAT6

— Scott MacFarlane (@MacFarlaneNews) October 2, 2023

Woo hoo. It’s a start but there are many other cases he’s not recusing from still.

Consumer Bureau case gets argued Tuesday and Thomas is very connected to amicus brief filers In that case

https://prospect.org/power/2023-10-02-clarence-thomas-another-conflict-of-interest/

This is surely only because his wife’s emails are in that order

Yep.

Meanwhile Roberts and Alito have a wealth tax case that they should recuse from

https://www.levernews.com/justices-have-financial-interest-in-major-tax-case/

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/10/samuel-alito-wants-racial-gerrymander-south-carolina.html

Oy veh.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, a challenge to South Carolina’s congressional map based on the contention that it was an impermissible racial gerrymander. The case should have been easy for the groups that challenged the map, given the applicable law and the arguments advanced by the state’s lawmakers in defense of their map—which was found to be unconstitutional by the lower court.

Unfortunately for the challengers of that map, Justice Samuel Alito had other ideas. After more than two hours of Alito-centered arguments, the question for his other conservative colleagues will be whether they side with him, change the law, and have the Supreme Court serve as a super-trial court in such cases—allowing the high court to reject trial court findings when they come out a way the conservative majority doesn’t like.

This would be a dramatic shift to current precedent, something that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson kept raising throughout the arguments, with an uncertain degree of success for the purposes of convincing Alito’s fellow conservatives.

A three-judge district court had, after an extensive trial, decided that South Carolina engaged in an impermissible racial gerrymander to one of its congressional districts in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

Washington Post take on the South Carolina gerrymander case

The Supreme Court on Wednesday seemed likely to reinstate a South Carolina congressional map drawn by the GOP-majority legislature that a lower court found “exiled” 30,000 Black voters to create a district safer for a White Republican incumbent.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/10/11/supreme-court-south-carolina-map-race-gerrymandering/

From Slate :

… In comparison to Alito’s 37 questions, the rest of the court—all eight justices combined—asked a total of 28 questions.”

Good shit, by which I mean, evil shit:

https://www.propublica.org/article/we-dont-talk-about-leonard-leo-supreme-court-supermajority

From gleaning that article I got that Leo is afraid that conservative Justices will resign to go get rich in the private sector, so he sets up a world where they are constantly licked by rich guys

that seems about right. feels, in the absence of a viable left wing in this country, like an incredibly hopeless state of affairs

I don't object to his approach, mind. At this point we have lots to learn.

But I understand how the conservative pathology is more apt to weaken at the knees at the thought of avoiding democratic norms.

From gleaning that article I got that Leo is afraid that conservative Justices will resign to go get rich in the private sector, so he sets up a world where they are constantly licked by rich guys

The article mentions Bettina Richards, but not her record label's name- It's Thrill Jockey Records. She has a house across from Leo in Maine!

Wow running Thrill Jockey must really let you ascend the corridors of power. Lots of billionaire Tortoise fans?

Billionaires now living will never die

X-post - she probably inherited her parents Maine home and while I have read elsewhere of her and her label donating to progressive causes , this article made it sound like she didn’t want to fight Leo too strenuously re the anti- Leo sign placed in her Maine lawn

https://slate.com/business/2023/10/clarence-thomas-rv-loan-forgiven-debt-taxes-welters.html

Clarence Thomas and his RV ....hmmm.

One of the trials of teaching tax law is the need to write a new exam every semester. But sometimes the real world sends you an exam question. In this case, that question comes courtesy of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his fancy RV. Or, more precisely, from the loan he received from his friend Anthony Welters to purchase the luxury vehicle. According to the New York Times, Thomas borrowed around $267,000 in 1999. At some point, after Thomas had made some interest payments and perhaps paid down some principal, Welters canceled the debt, according to a new Senate Finance Committee report. (A lawyer for Thomas denied the report, saying that the justice and his wife “made all payments to Mr. Welters on a regular basis until the terms of the agreement were satisfied in full.”) Relying on the report, a number of folks, including members of the committee, have pointed out that the alleged debt forgiveness creates something called cancellation of debt income, and they are wondering whether Thomas reported this income and paid tax on it. If he did, he’s in the clear. But if he didn’t, the question arises: Is Thomas, whose ethical standards and disclosures have come into question following a series of reports on gifts and travel from his various well-heeled friends, also a tax dodger?

(A lawyer for Thomas denied the report, saying that the justice and his wife “made all payments to Mr. Welters on a regular basis until the terms of the agreement were satisfied in full.”)

You know what would be more convincing than having your lawyer issue a denial to the press? Cancelled checks, receipts, or some kind of fucking evidence that money changed hands to the tune of $267,000 plus interest. Justice Thomas should try it.

BREAKING — The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote as soon as next week to issue subpoenas as part of its Supreme Court ethics investigation, Chair Durbin announces.

Subpoena targets:
—Harlan Crow
—Leonard Leo
—Robin Arkley II

Significant escalation of Dem-led probe. More TK.

— Andrew Desiderio (@AndrewDesiderio) October 30, 2023

BREAKING — The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote as soon as next week to issue subpoenas as part of its Supreme Court ethics investigation, Chair Durbin announces.

Subpoena targets:
—Harlan Crow
—Leonard Leo
—Robin Arkley II

Significant escalation of Dem-led probe. More TK.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/07/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence-rahimi/

The details of that Rahimi dude are *nuts*. Drug dealer got into a fight with his girlfriend in a parking lot. He knocked her to the ground, dragged her to the car, then fired a gun at a bystander. The girlfriend got away, but he threatened to shoot her if she called the police. Texas (Texas!) determined he was an ongoing threat and suspended his gun license. And yet ... he continued to fire his gun in public! And when the police went to his house to arrest him, they found plenty of guns, ammunition, and, reportedly, *a copy of the protective order.* Just brazen.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/13/politics/supreme-court-announcement/index.html

Good News : There's a new Supreme Court Code of Ethics

Bad News: “But the key is what’s missing: how are these rules going to be enforced, and by whom? Even the most rigorous ethical and financial reporting requirements won’t mean very much if there’s no one monitoring the justices’ compliance and no push back when those rules are violated,” Vladeck added. “And on that subject, today’s release says only that it will be up to the justices themselves. It’s hard to imagine that such a milquetoast response will satisfy most of the court’s critics.”

https://x.com/jaywillis/status/1724152519805546906?s=46&t=u2ZSlsY3trRV36IPP6jNDQ

Ethics Code allows appearances at Federalist Society events this tweet and responses to it suggest

From the very beginning, the Federalist Society functioned as an unofficial annex to the court, but lately the court has become more of a wholly owned subsidiary of the Federalist Society.

The conservative majority found this week that a prisoner in solitary confinement for around 3 years was not subject to the eighth amendment proscription against cruel and unusual punishment. The 3 liberal justices dissented, and while it won't change the decision, amazingly conservative columnist George Will agreed with Justice Jackson's dissent

justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from this denial, joined by Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Jackson, the first justice to have seen the criminal justice system from the perspective of a practicing public defender, notes that for nearly three years Johnson:

“… spent nearly every hour of his existence in a windowless, perpetually lit cell about the size of a parking space. His cell was poorly ventilated, resulting in unbearable heat and noxious odors. The space was … often caked with human waste. And because Pontiac officials would not provide cleaning supplies to Johnson unless he purchased them from the commissary, he was frequently forced to clean that filth with his bare hands. Johnson was allowed out of his cell to shower only once per week, for 10 brief minutes.”

prisons should not make prisoners worse. When Johnson’s mental illness made him difficult to manage, Pontiac’s punishments drove him deeper into insanity, and Pontiac continued punishing him for his resulting behaviors....The authors of the Eighth Amendment did not include a clause saying cruelty is unacceptable “unless the prisoner is unusually difficult or especially evil.” Just as the First Amendment protects even vile speech for the protection and betterment of society, the Eighth Amendment proscribes barbaric punishments for society’s sake — to insulate it from its inhumane impulses, to which humanity is prey.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/11/17/supreme-court-mistake-solitary-confinement/

tl,dr:

(1) The chances of the Democrats holding the Senate next November are between slim and none. Currently, the seven seats most likely to flip are all held by Democrats. You have to get to Ted Cruz in Texas before you get to a somewhat vulnerable Republican. Basically the Dems are going to be drawing to an inside straight here.

(2) I can’t exactly remember who is running for president for each party but I suspect it also adds to the uncertainty here.

(3) Sotomayor turns 70 next year. She has Type I diabetes. Kagan turns 64. They will have served on the SCOTUS for 15 and 14 years respectively.

(4) If you think that a Republican-controlled Senate will allow the confirmation of any SCOTUS nomination from Joe Biden then perhaps I could also interest you in some LoomCoin. If you think Donald Trump isn’t going to nominate an outright theocratic bomb throwing authoritarian, and/or that any GOP-controlled Senate won’t necessarily confirm whoever he nominates, I’d like to introduce you to Sam Bankman-Fried to help you make all your personal investing decisions.

SCOTUS is beyond a lost cause for the rest of our natural lifetimes

That happens to be your particular abnormality.

they need to say a justice is retiring in February pending a new nomination, vote that person in, then rescind the resignation. pack the courts by having justices change their mind

is there any reason hope the Democrats will ever do anything that radical? even the dual retirements scenario seems totally unlikely to me

No

pack the courts by having justices change their mind

sorry, but the only path to packing the court that would be legal first requires an act of Congress to officially allow more than nine justices on the court. only then could more seats be filled. simply bypassing Congress and pretending that suddenly there are ten or eleven justices because some resignations were rescinded would be no more legal than Trump's attempted coup d'etat was.

OK, cool.

I know there’s a containment thread for this but … there’s a not zero chance that Trump, TRUMP, picks over half the court’s nine seats

Nixon nominated Burger, Blackmun, Powell, and Rehnquist. So! All the more reason to get the vote out.

Sandra Day O'Connor dead.

gutted