U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

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

Jeez, I hope they catch the guy.

https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2023/12/oconnor-2

That is a pretty damning piece; fascinating

It would be a nice Murder, She Wrote episode to have a former Vice President murder a former Supreme Court Justice who kept him from becoming President. He waited 23 years so no one would suspect.

It's a damning piece in that it's mostly vitriol.

But he's kind of OTM that O'Connor didn't receive much vitriol while serving the Court mostly because she was a woman and because of Casey/Roe issues.

Vitriol can be true as it is in this case.

Well looks like Jack Smith is just throwing it out there:

Jack Smith, the special counsel prosecuting former President Donald J. Trump on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election, asked the Supreme Court on Monday to rule on Mr. Trump’s argument that he is immune from prosecution.

The request was unusual in two ways: Mr. Smith asked the justices to rule before an appeals court acted, and he urged them to move with exceptional speed.

looks to me like Smith is anticipating the Trump defense that's most likely to be accepted by a deferential Supreme court. if they rule in Trump's favor then Trump wriggles out again, plus the case against his co-conspirators is considerably weakened. maybe better to know now than wait to see.

hard to see this going Trump's way even with the current court, but you never know

The article I read said this is mostly about scheduling. Smith is trying to get the court to rule quickly to keep the May 2024 trial date. It is unlikely the trial could go forward by May 2024 if Smith had to wait for this to work it's way to the Court of Appeals (the normal channel) before going to the Supreme Court.

Bush v Gore in 2000 suggests to me this ruling against Trump isn't a slam dunk to be upheld by the SCOTUS

Trial date is March, not May.

Even more so then. If SC doesn't expedite their ruling, that isn't happening.

I don’t know the legal landscape on this issue really, but I sure as hell hope SCOTUS doesn’t say former presidents can’t be charged for anything they do in office. Hopefully even they might think that’s a bad idea!

If they DO rule that way, then Biden oughta go hog wild. Shoot a senator or two. Deport Melania. Tie up Harlan Crow and piss on his shoes.

He'd need to clear it with the Senate Dem caucus first. In case he got impeached they'd need to stonewall like the Republicans did for Trump.

I don’t know the legal landscape on this issue really, but I sure as hell hope SCOTUS doesn’t say former presidents can’t be charged for anything they do in office. Hopefully even they might think that’s a bad idea!

If they DO rule that way, then Biden oughta go hog wild. Shoot a senator or two. Deport Melania. Tie up Harlan Crow and piss on his shoes.

― a man often referred to in the news media as the Duke of Saxony (tipsy mothra), Monday, December 11, 2023

absolutely

If you shoot the right Senators they can’t impeach

Former presidents though. Watch your back, Brandon!