a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by am_Unition

The most benign theory I've heard is that these "perks" are given to the justices to dissuade them from retiring.

It'd be interesting to see if the majority of these trips and gifts are occurring while a democrat is in the white house, but yeah, of course I think that theory's absolutely bunk.





b_b  ·  503 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Lol. That’s even more generous than my theory that it doesn’t matter because the controversial cases are already decided before they make it to argument.

am_Unition  ·  373 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Well. It turns out that "the most benign theory" is 1. True and 2. Not really benign at all.

    In early January 2000, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was at a five-star beach resort in Sea Island, Georgia, hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.

lol

    George Priest, a Yale Law School professor who has vacationed with Thomas and Crow, told ProPublica he believes Crow’s generosity was not intended to influence Thomas’ views but rather to make his life more comfortable. “He views Thomas as a Supreme Court justice as having a limited salary,” Priest said. “So he provides benefits for him.”

A level of absurdism one such as myself can only aspire to.

I also very much dislike the specter of RBG's doings, but at least she reported things.

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg disclosed taking more trips than any other justice in 2018, totaling 14. She visited Tel Aviv, Israel where she was awarded a lifetime achievement award by the Genesis Prize Foundation. Shortly following the award ceremony, she disclosed being provided transportation, food and lodging as a tourist and guest of billionaire Israeli businessman Morris Kahn.

Objectively; This has to stop. It won't. I'm not passionately opposed to increasing SCOTUS salaries, but something tells me that people like Clarence Thomas have an insatiable lust for power.

am_Unition  ·  503 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Well obviously most of the court has usually already made up its mind and works backwards from there using bogus philosophies like cOnStiTuTiONaL oRiGinALiSm after "deliberations", but this corruption is about what happens before their minds are made up on any particular case, imho. Like billionaire buddies making generalized appeals to protect the interests of the wealthy and religious.

edit: But sometimes they get things right?