Friends of the Court
June 21, 2023 6:27 AM Subscribe
Justice Samuel Alito Took Luxury Fishing Vacation With GOP Billionaire Who Later Had Cases Before the Court (archive.today link)
In the years after the undisclosed trip to Alaska, Republican megadonor Paul Singer’s hedge fund has repeatedly had business before the Supreme Court. Alito has never recused himself.
...
ProPublica sent Alito a list of detailed questions last week, and on Tuesday, the Supreme Court’s head spokeswoman told ProPublica that Alito would not be commenting. Several hours later, The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed by Alito responding to ProPublica’s questions about the trip. (archive.today link)
ProPublica previously on another close personal friendship engendered by ascension to the Supreme Court.
In the years after the undisclosed trip to Alaska, Republican megadonor Paul Singer’s hedge fund has repeatedly had business before the Supreme Court. Alito has never recused himself.
...
ProPublica sent Alito a list of detailed questions last week, and on Tuesday, the Supreme Court’s head spokeswoman told ProPublica that Alito would not be commenting. Several hours later, The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed by Alito responding to ProPublica’s questions about the trip. (archive.today link)
ProPublica previously on another close personal friendship engendered by ascension to the Supreme Court.
That op-ed is hilarious and pathetic. 'There was an empty seat on the plane so it might as well be filled by me', instead of, say, a needy child, or anyone else without a conflict of interest. What bunk.
Sammy's mad. And he's not mad because he was falsely accused. He's mad because he was caught and how dare you catch him.
posted by Capt. Renault at 6:46 AM on June 21, 2023 [59 favorites]
Sammy's mad. And he's not mad because he was falsely accused. He's mad because he was caught and how dare you catch him.
posted by Capt. Renault at 6:46 AM on June 21, 2023 [59 favorites]
The funniest thing about the op/ed is he had to write it blind, without seeing what ProPublica would publish. And then ProPublica was able to get the last word in, responding to it in the article itself.
What really drops my jaw about this whole ongoing story is that the Big Ask from folks outside the court is mostly "hey, maybe y'all should have a code of ethics for your work". That's it! No one's even going after the big things like "these bribe-taking guys should maybe not be on the court".
posted by Nelson at 6:50 AM on June 21, 2023 [55 favorites]
In his op-ed, Alito said that justices “commonly interpreted” the law’s exception for hospitality “to mean that accommodations and transportation for social events were not reportable gifts.”Alito's argument in the op/ed was already weak; "yes I took those bribes and didn't tell anyone but it was technically legal". Here ProPublica just shreds his argument that the bribery and non-disclosure were legal.
His op-ed pointed to language in the judiciary’s filing instructions and cited definitions from Black’s Law Dictionary and Webster’s. But he did not make reference to the judiciary’s regulations or the law itself, which experts said both clearly required disclosure for gifts of travel. ProPublica found at least six examples of other federal judges disclosing gifts of private jet travel in recent years.
What really drops my jaw about this whole ongoing story is that the Big Ask from folks outside the court is mostly "hey, maybe y'all should have a code of ethics for your work". That's it! No one's even going after the big things like "these bribe-taking guys should maybe not be on the court".
posted by Nelson at 6:50 AM on June 21, 2023 [55 favorites]
ProPublica sent Alito a list of detailed questions last week, and on Tuesday, the Supreme Court’s head spokeswoman told ProPublica that Alito would not be commenting. Several hours later, The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed by Alito responding to ProPublica’s questions about the trip.
As a jurist, Alito would know that refusing to answer questions to which there would likely be follow-up questions, instead trying to avoid cross-examination via a friendly third party, is evidence of guilty knowledge, to say nothing of bad faith.
posted by Gelatin at 6:53 AM on June 21, 2023 [12 favorites]
As a jurist, Alito would know that refusing to answer questions to which there would likely be follow-up questions, instead trying to avoid cross-examination via a friendly third party, is evidence of guilty knowledge, to say nothing of bad faith.
posted by Gelatin at 6:53 AM on June 21, 2023 [12 favorites]
At this point, it's clear that a code of ethics isn't enough. We need laws that say that if a judge does not recuse themselves when there is a conflict of interest, then they don't get to be a judge anymore.
Also, the legal profession either needs to deal with the cancer that is the Federalist Society, or have it dealt with for them - as it seems that they are at the center of all of this corruption.
posted by NoxAeternum at 6:55 AM on June 21, 2023 [62 favorites]
Also, the legal profession either needs to deal with the cancer that is the Federalist Society, or have it dealt with for them - as it seems that they are at the center of all of this corruption.
posted by NoxAeternum at 6:55 AM on June 21, 2023 [62 favorites]
Of course the seat was unoccupied, since it was reserved for him all along.
These revelations are really frustrating to read, since right now there seems to be no effective mechanism to force actual accountability. But still, getting these things out into daylight is good and certainly exposes the extent of the influence trading going on.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:57 AM on June 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
These revelations are really frustrating to read, since right now there seems to be no effective mechanism to force actual accountability. But still, getting these things out into daylight is good and certainly exposes the extent of the influence trading going on.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:57 AM on June 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
The highest court in the land should have the highest standards and the strictest enforcement.
Seemed even more obvious as I was typing it.
posted by VTX at 6:59 AM on June 21, 2023 [28 favorites]
Seemed even more obvious as I was typing it.
posted by VTX at 6:59 AM on June 21, 2023 [28 favorites]
Considering how right-wing the WSJ is, a surprisingly large number of reader comments are saying how bad this looks for Scalia.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 7:00 AM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 7:00 AM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
How do you impose laws on the Supreme Court?
Can’t they simply declare any such law unconstitutional?
posted by The Monster at the End of this Thread at 7:01 AM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
Can’t they simply declare any such law unconstitutional?
posted by The Monster at the End of this Thread at 7:01 AM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
Even dyed in the wool capitalists will acknowledge that nobody should be wealthy enough that they can own a Supreme Court justice.
Gonna agree to disagree on your conception of capitalists there.
posted by Artw at 7:01 AM on June 21, 2023 [19 favorites]
Gonna agree to disagree on your conception of capitalists there.
posted by Artw at 7:01 AM on June 21, 2023 [19 favorites]
US Supreme court justices make $268,300 a year, while the Chief Justice makes $280,500. Not sure why they're being bought, other than basic human greed.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:02 AM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:02 AM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
In the op-ed, Alito says that he couldn't possibly have known that Singer was affiliated with the entities that had cases before the court. As a lawyer, I can tell you that that is complete bullshit.
Corporate entities are required to file disclosures with the federal courts identifying, among other things, individuals who have a financial interest in the outcome of the litigation. This rule is in place to avoid conflicts of interest.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 7:03 AM on June 21, 2023 [50 favorites]
Corporate entities are required to file disclosures with the federal courts identifying, among other things, individuals who have a financial interest in the outcome of the litigation. This rule is in place to avoid conflicts of interest.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 7:03 AM on June 21, 2023 [50 favorites]
US Supreme court justices make $268,300 a year, while the Chief Justice makes $280,500. Not sure why they're being bought, other than basic human greed.
It's not "greed" in the sense that billionaires have greed, where their net worth is a score. It's just comfort. They just don't have to worry that an expensive vacation means they won't be able to upgrade their kitchen, or send their kids to college. Taking away that bit of friction is a favor -- the one-percenters' equivalent of your neighbor watering your plants for you while you're out of town.
posted by Etrigan at 7:06 AM on June 21, 2023 [16 favorites]
It's not "greed" in the sense that billionaires have greed, where their net worth is a score. It's just comfort. They just don't have to worry that an expensive vacation means they won't be able to upgrade their kitchen, or send their kids to college. Taking away that bit of friction is a favor -- the one-percenters' equivalent of your neighbor watering your plants for you while you're out of town.
posted by Etrigan at 7:06 AM on June 21, 2023 [16 favorites]
Even dyed in the wool capitalists will acknowledge that nobody should be wealthy enough that they can own a Supreme Court justice.
Gonna agree to disagree on your conception of capitalists there.
Yeah, I thought owning a Supreme Court justice was like, a top-shelf prize for that crowd.
posted by Rykey at 7:08 AM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Gonna agree to disagree on your conception of capitalists there.
Yeah, I thought owning a Supreme Court justice was like, a top-shelf prize for that crowd.
posted by Rykey at 7:08 AM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
CLARENCE THOMAS: These free luxury vacations are totally ethical because the GOP donor who takes me on them is a dear friend! It’s just what friends do!
SAM ALITO: This free luxury vacation is totally ethical because I barely know the GOP donor who took me on it!
posted by Etrigan at 7:09 AM on June 21, 2023 [82 favorites]
SAM ALITO: This free luxury vacation is totally ethical because I barely know the GOP donor who took me on it!
posted by Etrigan at 7:09 AM on June 21, 2023 [82 favorites]
. Not sure why they're being bought, other than basic human greed.
So you are sure.
Coming from experience working places where we weren't allowed to accept so much as a 50¢ pen from a vendor it's hilarious to see these corrupt mother father cocker spaniels justify their bribe taking and poorly at that.
posted by Mitheral at 7:10 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
So you are sure.
Coming from experience working places where we weren't allowed to accept so much as a 50¢ pen from a vendor it's hilarious to see these corrupt mother father cocker spaniels justify their bribe taking and poorly at that.
posted by Mitheral at 7:10 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
Excited to learn is a Samuel Alito is a blogger now and very cool of WSJ.com to host his blog.
posted by srboisvert at 7:11 AM on June 21, 2023 [16 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 7:11 AM on June 21, 2023 [16 favorites]
What's deeply funny to me is that there will be no consequences. None! Never! Why the hell did he write that?!
There will never be 60 votes in the senate to impeach this guy and Biden will never do something like pro-rogue him (and Thomas) to enforce Article 3 good behavior requirements.
Like, I'll bet someone a $20 lunch here in Gaithersburg not only that nothing ever happens to him because of this but that the NYT will write a glowing obituary when he passes that never mentions it.
posted by Slackermagee at 7:13 AM on June 21, 2023 [11 favorites]
There will never be 60 votes in the senate to impeach this guy and Biden will never do something like pro-rogue him (and Thomas) to enforce Article 3 good behavior requirements.
Like, I'll bet someone a $20 lunch here in Gaithersburg not only that nothing ever happens to him because of this but that the NYT will write a glowing obituary when he passes that never mentions it.
posted by Slackermagee at 7:13 AM on June 21, 2023 [11 favorites]
Why the hell did he write that?!
To give the readers of the WSJ instructions on how to more effectively bribe Supreme Court Justices?
posted by LionIndex at 7:15 AM on June 21, 2023 [26 favorites]
To give the readers of the WSJ instructions on how to more effectively bribe Supreme Court Justices?
posted by LionIndex at 7:15 AM on June 21, 2023 [26 favorites]
He’s extremely pissy about anything that he or the Republican court lack integrity, and frequently kicks off when evidence to the contrary is produced. It is extremely funny apart from the him being extremely powerful bit.
posted by Artw at 7:15 AM on June 21, 2023 [16 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:15 AM on June 21, 2023 [16 favorites]
Again, the thing that kills me is how cheap this all is, how affordable these justices turned out to be.
The amount of money being spent here is nothing to these guys, they're buying supreme court justices for shaking-change-out-of-the-couch money.
posted by mhoye at 7:23 AM on June 21, 2023 [22 favorites]
The amount of money being spent here is nothing to these guys, they're buying supreme court justices for shaking-change-out-of-the-couch money.
posted by mhoye at 7:23 AM on June 21, 2023 [22 favorites]
Why the hell did he write that?!
To give the readers of the WSJ instructions on how to more effectively bribe Supreme Court Justices?
posted by LionIndex at 7:15 AM on June 21
To THINK I could be BOUGHT OFF with a mere fishing trip... As if it were a RIDE in a PRIVATE SPACESHIP
posted by rouftop at 7:27 AM on June 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
To give the readers of the WSJ instructions on how to more effectively bribe Supreme Court Justices?
posted by LionIndex at 7:15 AM on June 21
To THINK I could be BOUGHT OFF with a mere fishing trip... As if it were a RIDE in a PRIVATE SPACESHIP
posted by rouftop at 7:27 AM on June 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
What a piece of work. If Alito and Thomas care one fig about their legacies they need to stop with the arrogance and impunity.
posted by sid at 7:28 AM on June 21, 2023
posted by sid at 7:28 AM on June 21, 2023
As if it were a RIDE in a PRIVATE SPACESHIP
Or submarine
posted by Melismata at 7:31 AM on June 21, 2023 [38 favorites]
Or submarine
posted by Melismata at 7:31 AM on June 21, 2023 [38 favorites]
In his op-ed, Alito said that justices “commonly interpreted” the law’s exception for hospitality “to mean that accommodations and transportation for social events were not reportable gifts.”
See, in my employer handbook, it tells me what is an allowable gift. My interpretation doesn't matter -- I can accept a gift, say I interpreted it as allowed, but my employer gets the final say and I get censured/punished/etc. The problem is that "the rule of law" is mostly seen as "whatever benefits me and my friends is OK", and the people in charge of holding the Supreme Court to high legal standards think as long as they're ruling in their favor they get a pass.
Everyone's worried about cartoon levels of corruption, like Lisa Simpson catching a guy wanting to drill for oil in Mount Rushmore, but the big problem is everyone just letting things slide as long as they're the ones benefitting from the crime.
(also, didn't it used to be common that the Supreme Court travelled in order to hold proceedings? I'm sure the "accommodations and transportation for social events" was "in the course of their duties" and not "gift trips taken just for fun". )
posted by AzraelBrown at 7:33 AM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
See, in my employer handbook, it tells me what is an allowable gift. My interpretation doesn't matter -- I can accept a gift, say I interpreted it as allowed, but my employer gets the final say and I get censured/punished/etc. The problem is that "the rule of law" is mostly seen as "whatever benefits me and my friends is OK", and the people in charge of holding the Supreme Court to high legal standards think as long as they're ruling in their favor they get a pass.
Everyone's worried about cartoon levels of corruption, like Lisa Simpson catching a guy wanting to drill for oil in Mount Rushmore, but the big problem is everyone just letting things slide as long as they're the ones benefitting from the crime.
(also, didn't it used to be common that the Supreme Court travelled in order to hold proceedings? I'm sure the "accommodations and transportation for social events" was "in the course of their duties" and not "gift trips taken just for fun". )
posted by AzraelBrown at 7:33 AM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
These guys get interviewed by pretty serious law schools. How to influence the [influencers of the law school interviewers] to get embarrassing questions to be asked at these very serious interviews?
Can impeach, can't suggest the "improper" suggestion even as a joke, can't really wait for natural causes, can't foment revolution, can't we at least publicly embarrass them?
posted by sammyo at 7:34 AM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Can impeach, can't suggest the "improper" suggestion even as a joke, can't really wait for natural causes, can't foment revolution, can't we at least publicly embarrass them?
posted by sammyo at 7:34 AM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
"Coming from experience working places where we weren't allowed to accept so much as a 50¢ pen from a vendor..."
I've only known a couple people appointed to the bench, and it was astonishing how they cut out all social involvement in order to avoid potential conflicts as a judge. They had their lives before, and now they had this new (much lonelier) life. These appointees were just garden variety intake and family court judges, and they were hyper-fucking-aware of the need to avoid conflict or appearance of bias.
Alito and Thomas -- they no doubt know these rules (whether the rules are codified or not). Not only are they flaunting the rules, they probably get off on this shit.
posted by Capt. Renault at 7:37 AM on June 21, 2023 [20 favorites]
I've only known a couple people appointed to the bench, and it was astonishing how they cut out all social involvement in order to avoid potential conflicts as a judge. They had their lives before, and now they had this new (much lonelier) life. These appointees were just garden variety intake and family court judges, and they were hyper-fucking-aware of the need to avoid conflict or appearance of bias.
Alito and Thomas -- they no doubt know these rules (whether the rules are codified or not). Not only are they flaunting the rules, they probably get off on this shit.
posted by Capt. Renault at 7:37 AM on June 21, 2023 [20 favorites]
Alito says that the seat would have been empty had he not accepted it, but surely that isn’t true; Clarence Thomas would have been next in line.
posted by Whale Oil at 7:43 AM on June 21, 2023 [14 favorites]
posted by Whale Oil at 7:43 AM on June 21, 2023 [14 favorites]
Alito and Thomas -- they no doubt know these rules (whether the rules are codified or not). Not only are they flaunting the rules, they probably get off on this shit.
Remember that one of the (minor) revelations in the Thomas kerfuffle of the long-ago days of yore in (checks notes) April 2023 was that the Los Angeles Times reported on the Harlan Crow gifts in 2004 after they took the unprecedented journalistic step of (checks notes again) looking at Thomas's disclosure reports. So Thomas stopped putting them on his disclosure reports. In 2004, he felt some level of, if not shame, then at least self-preservation that made him realize he couldn't just say "Fuck you, I'm a Supreme Court Justice and you can't get 17 Republicans to vote to impeach me."
But in 2023, the list of probable sanctions is so utterly non-scary to them that they're admitting the obvious and essentially daring people to do anything about it.
posted by Etrigan at 7:44 AM on June 21, 2023 [18 favorites]
Remember that one of the (minor) revelations in the Thomas kerfuffle of the long-ago days of yore in (checks notes) April 2023 was that the Los Angeles Times reported on the Harlan Crow gifts in 2004 after they took the unprecedented journalistic step of (checks notes again) looking at Thomas's disclosure reports. So Thomas stopped putting them on his disclosure reports. In 2004, he felt some level of, if not shame, then at least self-preservation that made him realize he couldn't just say "Fuck you, I'm a Supreme Court Justice and you can't get 17 Republicans to vote to impeach me."
But in 2023, the list of probable sanctions is so utterly non-scary to them that they're admitting the obvious and essentially daring people to do anything about it.
posted by Etrigan at 7:44 AM on June 21, 2023 [18 favorites]
“ Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”
posted by Artw at 7:45 AM on June 21, 2023 [22 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:45 AM on June 21, 2023 [22 favorites]
This year we discovered that some people are in fact that wealthy, in no small part because the market rate for a Justice of the Supreme Court is quite low.
I think this is the most insulting part. It's not that people are up for sale. It appears that everyone is. It's that they go for so fucking cheap. The ROI onbribing lobbying powerful officials is crazy.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:45 AM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
I think this is the most insulting part. It's not that people are up for sale. It appears that everyone is. It's that they go for so fucking cheap. The ROI on
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 7:45 AM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
When the Payola scandal broke out, and Allan Freed was on trial, Chuck Berry protested. I can't find the exact quote, but Berry pointed out that Freed had turned him into a millionaire, without gaining a cent in the process, and that Berry should have every right to give him a gift after the fact.
If Samuel Alito wants to whine about being held to a lower standard than a 1950s DJ, his legacy will consist of nothing else.
posted by ocschwar at 7:51 AM on June 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
If Samuel Alito wants to whine about being held to a lower standard than a 1950s DJ, his legacy will consist of nothing else.
posted by ocschwar at 7:51 AM on June 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
Keep in mind that this is the only bribe Alito has taken that we know about so far. The one documented enough that ProPublica could run a whole story on it. The one where a lodge worker remembered the visit and could offer the astonishing quote “We take good care of him because he makes all the rules.”
But it's unlikely Alito took just the one bribe. Or that Thomas took the 3+ that ProPublica has so carefully documented. The real question is how many bribes these two took, and how many the other justices have been taking. I'm sure it adds up to more than just a fishing trip.
posted by Nelson at 7:58 AM on June 21, 2023 [17 favorites]
But it's unlikely Alito took just the one bribe. Or that Thomas took the 3+ that ProPublica has so carefully documented. The real question is how many bribes these two took, and how many the other justices have been taking. I'm sure it adds up to more than just a fishing trip.
posted by Nelson at 7:58 AM on June 21, 2023 [17 favorites]
Samuel Alito’s WSJ Op-Ed Is Raising A Lot Of Questions Supposedly Answered By The Op-Ed
posted by Artw at 7:58 AM on June 21, 2023 [18 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:58 AM on June 21, 2023 [18 favorites]
Can't decide whether the better metaphorical image in that article is Alito being landed as a huge fish or Scalia making martinis with glacier ice.
posted by HeroZero at 8:02 AM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by HeroZero at 8:02 AM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
The problem is that "the rule of law" is mostly seen as "whatever benefits me and my friends is OK"
posted by Gelatin at 8:02 AM on June 21, 2023 [10 favorites]
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.--Wilhoit's Law
posted by Gelatin at 8:02 AM on June 21, 2023 [10 favorites]
This is so laughably outrageous. The fucking highest court in the US, the one that is making legal decisions that affect every single one of the citizens of the US, have absolutely no ethics. It's not that they don't have standards, they just don't have any ethics. Any rules that they think they are following are so egregiously selfish and so out of touch with anything a typical citizen encounters, it is enraging. And we can't even throw those fuckers out.
posted by bluesky43 at 8:03 AM on June 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by bluesky43 at 8:03 AM on June 21, 2023 [13 favorites]
We are a lot of comments into this with nary a "surely this."
Because I mean come on really: SURELY THIS
posted by chavenet at 8:07 AM on June 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
Because I mean come on really: SURELY THIS
posted by chavenet at 8:07 AM on June 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
Ah, the party of personal responsibility, law and order strikes again!
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 8:08 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 8:08 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
We are a lot of comments into this with nary a "surely this."
Because I mean come on really: SURELY THIS
The Thomas/Crow stuff was worse--hell, the Kavanaugh stuff was worse--with absolutely zero lingering effect, so.
Expand and unpack the Court.
posted by Gadarene at 8:09 AM on June 21, 2023 [10 favorites]
Because I mean come on really: SURELY THIS
The Thomas/Crow stuff was worse--hell, the Kavanaugh stuff was worse--with absolutely zero lingering effect, so.
Expand and unpack the Court.
posted by Gadarene at 8:09 AM on June 21, 2023 [10 favorites]
"I was waiting at the Greyhound station to catch a bus to Alaska when a man passing by said, 'Hey buddy, I'm heading to Alaska too and got an open seat on my private plane, you wanna hop on? No charge.' I was touched by this anonymous stranger's unprompted offer and took him up on it. So you see, no impropriety at all."
posted by star gentle uterus at 8:11 AM on June 21, 2023 [11 favorites]
posted by star gentle uterus at 8:11 AM on June 21, 2023 [11 favorites]
Alito is also the most pissiest about Dobbs being leaked and the prime suspect for having leaked it, due to his prior form.
posted by Artw at 8:12 AM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 8:12 AM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
Maybe the Supreme Court justices need to do the same annual refresher I’ve had to do at every job I’ve had where a cast of office worker stock photos explains how any gift with a face value greater than five bucks can be considered a bribe and must be refused.
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 8:12 AM on June 21, 2023 [51 favorites]
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 8:12 AM on June 21, 2023 [51 favorites]
Even dyed in the wool capitalists will acknowledge that nobody should be wealthy enough that they can own a Supreme Court justice.
Yes, they will acknowledge it. But they'll also leap at the opportunity to buy one the first chance they get. Every single one. ACAB, as it were.
I think this is the most insulting part. It's not that people are up for sale. It appears that everyone is. It's that they go for so fucking cheap.
This is a misconception of wealth that non-wealthy people have. Buying a judge is not like buying a loaf of bread; there's no single price tag and then the transaction is done. Rather, you need to demonstrate that you can be a continuing source of wealth. Think art patronage rather than a mall Thomas Kinkade store. It's about a continuing relationship of bribes than a single bribe.
This is just how bribery has evolved. No one accepts a briefcase of cash anymore (well, maybe they do, I don't know, rich people aren't all that smart). Instead, they hire your son-in-law with an impressive salary to do a bullshit job at their company. Accepting a briefcase of cash is too obvious (and photographable). A free flight on a private jet? Hey, that seat would have been empty otherwise.
If Jeff Bezos wants to be the not-actually-first billionaire to fly to not-actually-space, he can't just go to the dick rocket store and buy one. He has to hire people, form relationships, etc.
Why? Because wealth isn't about a number in a bank account (not at those levels) but about projection of wealth and position in a web of social relationships. That's why rich people lie about how rich they are and blow money on stupid social status shit. You very much need to impress all the other rich assholes so they know you're a member of the club. New money may be cringe for old money, but it's forgivable as long they aren't temporary money.
Daniel Radcliffe can't just walk into an art gallery and buy a piece of art, because the dealer wanted to sell it to a more prestigious collector. But then the artist knew who Radcliffe was and of course wanted to sell it to him and it kicked off a friendship that introduced Radcliffe to a lot artists in the LGBT NYC scene.
Part of the club.
posted by AlSweigart at 8:18 AM on June 21, 2023 [10 favorites]
Yes, they will acknowledge it. But they'll also leap at the opportunity to buy one the first chance they get. Every single one. ACAB, as it were.
I think this is the most insulting part. It's not that people are up for sale. It appears that everyone is. It's that they go for so fucking cheap.
This is a misconception of wealth that non-wealthy people have. Buying a judge is not like buying a loaf of bread; there's no single price tag and then the transaction is done. Rather, you need to demonstrate that you can be a continuing source of wealth. Think art patronage rather than a mall Thomas Kinkade store. It's about a continuing relationship of bribes than a single bribe.
This is just how bribery has evolved. No one accepts a briefcase of cash anymore (well, maybe they do, I don't know, rich people aren't all that smart). Instead, they hire your son-in-law with an impressive salary to do a bullshit job at their company. Accepting a briefcase of cash is too obvious (and photographable). A free flight on a private jet? Hey, that seat would have been empty otherwise.
If Jeff Bezos wants to be the not-actually-first billionaire to fly to not-actually-space, he can't just go to the dick rocket store and buy one. He has to hire people, form relationships, etc.
Why? Because wealth isn't about a number in a bank account (not at those levels) but about projection of wealth and position in a web of social relationships. That's why rich people lie about how rich they are and blow money on stupid social status shit. You very much need to impress all the other rich assholes so they know you're a member of the club. New money may be cringe for old money, but it's forgivable as long they aren't temporary money.
Daniel Radcliffe can't just walk into an art gallery and buy a piece of art, because the dealer wanted to sell it to a more prestigious collector. But then the artist knew who Radcliffe was and of course wanted to sell it to him and it kicked off a friendship that introduced Radcliffe to a lot artists in the LGBT NYC scene.
Part of the club.
posted by AlSweigart at 8:18 AM on June 21, 2023 [10 favorites]
God the US is so broken.
posted by nushustu at 8:23 AM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by nushustu at 8:23 AM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
Also:
posted by star gentle uterus at 8:23 AM on June 21, 2023 [15 favorites]
As for the flight, Mr. Singer and others had already made arrangements to fly to Alaska when I was invited shortly before the event, and I was asked whether I would like to fly there in a seat that, as far as I am aware, would have otherwise been vacant. It was my understanding that this would not impose any extra cost on Mr. Singer.What horseshit. So if I already own a private plane and a private island in the Caribbean, it's not improper to fly out a Justice for a fabulous tropical vacation week with me on my island because I incur no extra costs?
posted by star gentle uterus at 8:23 AM on June 21, 2023 [15 favorites]
At $280k a year wouldn’t these SC justices be poorer than quite a few of the much younger lawyers arguing in front of them?
Envy is a hell of a drug.
posted by The Monster at the End of this Thread at 8:30 AM on June 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
Envy is a hell of a drug.
posted by The Monster at the End of this Thread at 8:30 AM on June 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
Samuel Alito has discovered the one simple trick that regulators hate. I just happened to have this briefcase full of cash already prepared, and I was already planning to release it from my grip at 3:00pm in the Denny's parking lot. If he hadn't been there to arrest its fall, it would have landed on the pavement while I walked away, and I would have been out the money anyway. That's not bribery; it's simple physics!
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 8:33 AM on June 21, 2023 [41 favorites]
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 8:33 AM on June 21, 2023 [41 favorites]
At $280k per annum, more money doesn't really buy you more comfort. It only buys you more status.
And if a lifetime appointment to the most important judicial spot on the planet isn't enough status for you, then you don't belong on the Court.
posted by ocschwar at 8:35 AM on June 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
And if a lifetime appointment to the most important judicial spot on the planet isn't enough status for you, then you don't belong on the Court.
posted by ocschwar at 8:35 AM on June 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
If Alito was actually a lawyer, he'd understand that the reportable value is the value to him of the gift, not what the briber spent on the gift. A plane ticket and an all-expense-paid trip has inherent value, not what it cost.
Like, if a client says "I got these concert tickets for free, here you go" I have to report the retail value of the tickets, not "they were free".
posted by AzraelBrown at 8:35 AM on June 21, 2023 [29 favorites]
Like, if a client says "I got these concert tickets for free, here you go" I have to report the retail value of the tickets, not "they were free".
posted by AzraelBrown at 8:35 AM on June 21, 2023 [29 favorites]
At $280k a year wouldn’t these SC justices be poorer than quite a few of the much younger lawyers arguing in front of them?
I'd be shocked if it was 100% of them. Like POTUS, no one is in it for the salary. If there they were, they'd have a different job.
posted by Back At It Again At Krispy Kreme at 8:43 AM on June 21, 2023
I'd be shocked if it was 100% of them. Like POTUS, no one is in it for the salary. If there they were, they'd have a different job.
posted by Back At It Again At Krispy Kreme at 8:43 AM on June 21, 2023
The real question is how many bribes these two took, and how many the other justices have been taking.
Didn't Scalia die during while being hosted at Venture Capitalist and Republican Political Operator John Poindexter's luxury hunting lodge in Texas?
posted by Rumple at 9:06 AM on June 21, 2023 [12 favorites]
Didn't Scalia die during while being hosted at Venture Capitalist and Republican Political Operator John Poindexter's luxury hunting lodge in Texas?
posted by Rumple at 9:06 AM on June 21, 2023 [12 favorites]
AlSweigart: "Buying a judge is not like buying a loaf of bread; there's no single price tag and then the transaction is done. "
Disagree. I'm from Chicago, and we have a saying there: "An honest judge is one who stays bought."
posted by adamrice at 9:09 AM on June 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
Disagree. I'm from Chicago, and we have a saying there: "An honest judge is one who stays bought."
posted by adamrice at 9:09 AM on June 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
Scalia technically non corrupt since he did not leave the premises alive.
posted by Artw at 9:11 AM on June 21, 2023 [9 favorites]
posted by Artw at 9:11 AM on June 21, 2023 [9 favorites]
Scalia borrowing the Nixon refrain: I AM NOT A CROOK.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 9:36 AM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by gentlyepigrams at 9:36 AM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
So, a kickstarter? Buy ourselves a judge, get some favorable rulings.
posted by From Bklyn at 9:39 AM on June 21, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by From Bklyn at 9:39 AM on June 21, 2023 [10 favorites]
I'm a bit intrigued by the concept of billionaires who "have business before the court". It makes me wonder exactly how billionaires get their business issue to SCOTUS.
Is there an expedited (or greased) pathway for the rich, to get their oh-so-vital concerns stamped by the highest court (which should be spending its time on issues of highest constitutional import on behalf of the people, rather than serving The Rich)?
posted by Dashy at 9:59 AM on June 21, 2023
Is there an expedited (or greased) pathway for the rich, to get their oh-so-vital concerns stamped by the highest court (which should be spending its time on issues of highest constitutional import on behalf of the people, rather than serving The Rich)?
posted by Dashy at 9:59 AM on June 21, 2023
Biden's admin did a study on reforming the court (link) back in 2021.
With the results here. With the summary:
Opponents contend that expanding—or “packing”—the Court would significantly diminish its independence and legitimacy and establish a dangerous precedent that could be used by any future political force as a means of pressuring or intimidating the Court.
Highlight mine - could the Court be any less credible at this stage? Add Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, and, I dunno - Elizabeth Warren and we'll call it even.
posted by Farce_First at 10:00 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
With the results here. With the summary:
Opponents contend that expanding—or “packing”—the Court would significantly diminish its independence and legitimacy and establish a dangerous precedent that could be used by any future political force as a means of pressuring or intimidating the Court.
Highlight mine - could the Court be any less credible at this stage? Add Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, and, I dunno - Elizabeth Warren and we'll call it even.
posted by Farce_First at 10:00 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
Half of Alito’s defense relies on… dictionary definitions?
My sixth-grade writing students weren’t allowed to cite dictionary definitions in their argumentative essays. Too lazy and specious for academic writing. But not for a Supreme Court justice!
posted by notyou at 10:08 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
My sixth-grade writing students weren’t allowed to cite dictionary definitions in their argumentative essays. Too lazy and specious for academic writing. But not for a Supreme Court justice!
posted by notyou at 10:08 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
As usual there are absolutely no consequences for Republicans. The Right just does what it wants. That isn't the worst part, though.
The worst part is that everyone who isn't a Republican scraps and hems and huffs at each other over the correct way to respond — which just ends up letting Republicans continue to betray the public and the country without consequences, unimpeded.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:09 AM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
The worst part is that everyone who isn't a Republican scraps and hems and huffs at each other over the correct way to respond — which just ends up letting Republicans continue to betray the public and the country without consequences, unimpeded.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:09 AM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Ultimately, I would like to know what red line has to be crossed — when previous lines were already crossed repeatedly by three (probably four, counting Kennedy) separate Republican judges, at least — to get the executive branch to act to defend the Constitution and the United States.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:15 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:15 AM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
Could a Republican Supreme Court Justice kill a man in broad daylight on 5th Avenue and get away with it?
I no longer think that's an automatic "No".
posted by riverlife at 10:25 AM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
I no longer think that's an automatic "No".
posted by riverlife at 10:25 AM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
You know what? Go on the trip. Hang out with your non-friend. Just report it and recuse yourself afterwards.
What is a justice that doesn't err on the side of propriety?
Half of Alito’s defense relies on… dictionary definitions?
OED or go home.
posted by trig at 10:25 AM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
What is a justice that doesn't err on the side of propriety?
Half of Alito’s defense relies on… dictionary definitions?
OED or go home.
posted by trig at 10:25 AM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
> US Supreme court justices make $268,300 a year, while the Chief Justice makes $280,500. Not sure why they're being bought, other than basic human greed.
The gulf in wealth inequality is so great that $268k a year, while it seems like a lot to most of the world, feels like nothing if you're hobnobbing with the politicos in DC.
posted by dis_integration at 10:39 AM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
The gulf in wealth inequality is so great that $268k a year, while it seems like a lot to most of the world, feels like nothing if you're hobnobbing with the politicos in DC.
posted by dis_integration at 10:39 AM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
I'm surprised he just didn't say 'I can't have friends? Who'd want that job then?'
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 10:40 AM on June 21, 2023
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 10:40 AM on June 21, 2023
The gulf in wealth inequality is so great that $268k a year, while it seems like a lot to most of the world, feels like nothing if you're hobnobbing with the politicos in DC.
Yea, I earn twice that debugging distributed computer systems. But I also have to refuse all gifts greater than like 20 bucks so maybe it all balances out.
posted by pwnguin at 10:44 AM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
Yea, I earn twice that debugging distributed computer systems. But I also have to refuse all gifts greater than like 20 bucks so maybe it all balances out.
posted by pwnguin at 10:44 AM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
I like the part where he pats himself on the back for saving the US Marshals a few hours of their time by not flying commercial. So selfless of wealthy people to donate their private jet space to officials and reduce the taxpayer burden!
Also, a certain Florida Man really likes the five-finger private flight discount, too.
posted by credulous at 11:02 AM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
Also, a certain Florida Man really likes the five-finger private flight discount, too.
posted by credulous at 11:02 AM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
The gulf in wealth inequality is so great that $268k a year, while it seems like a lot to most of the world
That's "hopefully I'll be able to afford to own a home in my lifetime" money in much of the US.
posted by Back At It Again At Krispy Kreme at 11:13 AM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
That's "hopefully I'll be able to afford to own a home in my lifetime" money in much of the US.
posted by Back At It Again At Krispy Kreme at 11:13 AM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Wait, are you saying people who make $268k/yr are having trouble buying houses?
posted by joannemerriam at 12:04 PM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by joannemerriam at 12:04 PM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
[Ctrl-F "Surely this"]
Okay, very good. Carry on.
posted by Hamusutaa at 12:06 PM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
Okay, very good. Carry on.
posted by Hamusutaa at 12:06 PM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
Wait, are you saying people who make $268k/yr are having trouble buying houses?
That's actually plausible. Northern Virginia be cray cray. Just not sure if it applies to any present Justice since they've had ample opportunity to find digs before getting nominated. And to find money.
posted by ocschwar at 12:07 PM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
That's actually plausible. Northern Virginia be cray cray. Just not sure if it applies to any present Justice since they've had ample opportunity to find digs before getting nominated. And to find money.
posted by ocschwar at 12:07 PM on June 21, 2023 [2 favorites]
You know what? Go on the trip. Hang out with your non-friend. Just report it and recuse yourself afterwards.
The reason they don't is because they know the parties will stop, which means that they know these are bribes.
If they thought they could recuse and still go to parties, then they get the best of both worlds: parties and not having to do work.
posted by AzraelBrown at 12:11 PM on June 21, 2023 [11 favorites]
The reason they don't is because they know the parties will stop, which means that they know these are bribes.
If they thought they could recuse and still go to parties, then they get the best of both worlds: parties and not having to do work.
posted by AzraelBrown at 12:11 PM on June 21, 2023 [11 favorites]
Most of the Justices also have spouses who make bank too, right?
But I don't find it plausible that even a single-income household of $268k/yr is having trouble buying a house, even in northern Virginia, if they lived like normal people and not in a mansion. The median home cost in Washington DC is $668,250; even if you assume a house that costs $1 million, with somehow no downpayment, that's still only like $5-6k/month.
The problem is they hobnob with people who have exponentially more wealth than they do, so living like a normal person seems like a hardship. But I don't think we need to buy into that frame.
posted by joannemerriam at 12:21 PM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
But I don't find it plausible that even a single-income household of $268k/yr is having trouble buying a house, even in northern Virginia, if they lived like normal people and not in a mansion. The median home cost in Washington DC is $668,250; even if you assume a house that costs $1 million, with somehow no downpayment, that's still only like $5-6k/month.
The problem is they hobnob with people who have exponentially more wealth than they do, so living like a normal person seems like a hardship. But I don't think we need to buy into that frame.
posted by joannemerriam at 12:21 PM on June 21, 2023 [6 favorites]
joannemerriam: "Wait, are you saying people who make $268k/yr are having trouble buying houses?"
Average price of a home in Arlington VA, Bethesda MD, and Alexandria VA (all in the DC area) is right around US$1 million. In DC proper, it's $1.15 million. I've read that you shouldn't spend more than 3-5x your annual income on a home, so that would put a Supreme Court justice in an average home, excluding other sources of income.
On the one hand, you might expect somewhat at the pinnacle of the nation's legal profession to be able to afford something a little fancier. On the other, they're public servants, not (putatively) in it for the money, so maybe not.
On postview, I see I've come up with different figures than joannemerriam. Not sure which is more reliable.
posted by adamrice at 12:41 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Average price of a home in Arlington VA, Bethesda MD, and Alexandria VA (all in the DC area) is right around US$1 million. In DC proper, it's $1.15 million. I've read that you shouldn't spend more than 3-5x your annual income on a home, so that would put a Supreme Court justice in an average home, excluding other sources of income.
On the one hand, you might expect somewhat at the pinnacle of the nation's legal profession to be able to afford something a little fancier. On the other, they're public servants, not (putatively) in it for the money, so maybe not.
On postview, I see I've come up with different figures than joannemerriam. Not sure which is more reliable.
posted by adamrice at 12:41 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
The problem is they hobnob with people who have exponentially more wealth than they do, so living like a normal person seems like a hardship. But I don't think we need to buy into that frame.
I don't think anyone here is saying it's proper or reasonable that a Supreme Court Justice might be envious of or brainwormed by the wealth of the people they hobnob with. We're not "buying into the frame" so much as we're saying that no one should say that Alito makes so much money that he couldn't possibly be bought off by a billionaire.
posted by Etrigan at 12:55 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
I don't think anyone here is saying it's proper or reasonable that a Supreme Court Justice might be envious of or brainwormed by the wealth of the people they hobnob with. We're not "buying into the frame" so much as we're saying that no one should say that Alito makes so much money that he couldn't possibly be bought off by a billionaire.
posted by Etrigan at 12:55 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
I've read that you shouldn't spend more than 3-5x your annual income on a home, so that would put a Supreme Court justice in an average home, excluding other sources of income
Alito is 73 years old, not a first time home buyer. So, 3-5X of your annual income doesn't apply to him, unless he has been extremely profligate with his income. His previous home sold for $1m back in 2007 before he became a Supreme Court Justice. Also his net worth jumped to around $6m in 2013; it's probably higher now.
posted by The_Vegetables at 2:14 PM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Alito is 73 years old, not a first time home buyer. So, 3-5X of your annual income doesn't apply to him, unless he has been extremely profligate with his income. His previous home sold for $1m back in 2007 before he became a Supreme Court Justice. Also his net worth jumped to around $6m in 2013; it's probably higher now.
posted by The_Vegetables at 2:14 PM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
This article is several weeks old but freshly relevant: Dem Senator: Scalia accepted over 70 undisclosed gifts similar to Clarence Thomas.
posted by Nelson at 2:15 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Nelson at 2:15 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
What an entirely loathsome person. I'd say he's an embarrassment to the Court, but at this point I'm not sure it has any dignity left.
Like the destructive frat boys they are, the Federalist Society, Ivy League majority just wanted to write their names all over the walls before burning the joint down. While pretending to be conservative, of all things.
What is being conserved, exactly?
posted by snuffleupagus at 2:30 PM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
Like the destructive frat boys they are, the Federalist Society, Ivy League majority just wanted to write their names all over the walls before burning the joint down. While pretending to be conservative, of all things.
What is being conserved, exactly?
posted by snuffleupagus at 2:30 PM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
At $280k per annum, more money doesn't really buy you more comfort. It only buys you more status.
As someone who grew up in this tax bracket, I can say that this is definitively not true. It's just that $280k is right around the point where the cost of extra units of comfort starts to go up by orders of magnitude. At $280k in a high cost of living area you probably live in a highly desirable neighborhood, but far from the nicest or biggest place in that neighborhood. You can afford to send your kids to expensive private schools, but you need to plan and save around it. You can take expensive fancy vacations, but probably only once a year or every other year. You can save up for a very comfortable retirement, but it will involve compromising on other things. (To give a concrete example: my dad retired in his late 50's, but he was also the weirdo who drove a Ford Taurus while all of the people who reported to him drove BMWs and Lexuses.)
None of which is to say that anyone should pity me and the poor Supreme Court Justices, trapped in the lower rungs of the upper class. But the differences are real and they are keenly felt when this is your whole world. I was shocked to discover in my teenage years that my friends from the local public school thought of us as ludicrously rich, when I was convinced we were thoroughly middle class. That wasn't because I was oblivious, or dumb, or evil (or at least no more so than most teenagers). It was because I had spent most of my early life going to private schools and private camps, and hanging out with the children of my parents' Ivy League college friends, and because we lived in a big house in a fancy neighborhood, but were surrounded by bigger and fancier houses, and because here in America we have an ideological commitment to the idea that everyone who isn't struggling to eat or the owner of a large company is middle class. If you've ever read Pride and Prejudice and felt bad for the Bennet sisters who are so impoverished compared to the Bingleys or Darcys or even the Lucases, then you've fallen into the same trap.
And that all connects to a point I saw made about Thomas that applies equally here: the bribes are not to sway their opinions, they're to keep them on the court. Supreme Court Justices make a lot of money, but they are absolutely surrounded by people who make more money. Almost every lawyer who argues before them (who isn't a government employee) makes twice what they do, and some make much more than that. Their clerks leave their service and make almost as much as they do in their first year of actual practice. The justices themselves could probably increase their income by 5 or 10x by leaving the court and going to work for a white shoe law firm.
If you're an up-by-your-bootstraps libertarian-leaning conservative like Alito or Thomas, of course you believe that you have risen to the apex of the American legal profession because of your own hard work and genius, and the sort of lifestyle you see around you ought to be yours, and if you don't get them from your billionaire friends, you might be tempted to go do something that would let you buy them for yourself.
posted by firechicago at 2:32 PM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
As someone who grew up in this tax bracket, I can say that this is definitively not true. It's just that $280k is right around the point where the cost of extra units of comfort starts to go up by orders of magnitude. At $280k in a high cost of living area you probably live in a highly desirable neighborhood, but far from the nicest or biggest place in that neighborhood. You can afford to send your kids to expensive private schools, but you need to plan and save around it. You can take expensive fancy vacations, but probably only once a year or every other year. You can save up for a very comfortable retirement, but it will involve compromising on other things. (To give a concrete example: my dad retired in his late 50's, but he was also the weirdo who drove a Ford Taurus while all of the people who reported to him drove BMWs and Lexuses.)
None of which is to say that anyone should pity me and the poor Supreme Court Justices, trapped in the lower rungs of the upper class. But the differences are real and they are keenly felt when this is your whole world. I was shocked to discover in my teenage years that my friends from the local public school thought of us as ludicrously rich, when I was convinced we were thoroughly middle class. That wasn't because I was oblivious, or dumb, or evil (or at least no more so than most teenagers). It was because I had spent most of my early life going to private schools and private camps, and hanging out with the children of my parents' Ivy League college friends, and because we lived in a big house in a fancy neighborhood, but were surrounded by bigger and fancier houses, and because here in America we have an ideological commitment to the idea that everyone who isn't struggling to eat or the owner of a large company is middle class. If you've ever read Pride and Prejudice and felt bad for the Bennet sisters who are so impoverished compared to the Bingleys or Darcys or even the Lucases, then you've fallen into the same trap.
And that all connects to a point I saw made about Thomas that applies equally here: the bribes are not to sway their opinions, they're to keep them on the court. Supreme Court Justices make a lot of money, but they are absolutely surrounded by people who make more money. Almost every lawyer who argues before them (who isn't a government employee) makes twice what they do, and some make much more than that. Their clerks leave their service and make almost as much as they do in their first year of actual practice. The justices themselves could probably increase their income by 5 or 10x by leaving the court and going to work for a white shoe law firm.
If you're an up-by-your-bootstraps libertarian-leaning conservative like Alito or Thomas, of course you believe that you have risen to the apex of the American legal profession because of your own hard work and genius, and the sort of lifestyle you see around you ought to be yours, and if you don't get them from your billionaire friends, you might be tempted to go do something that would let you buy them for yourself.
posted by firechicago at 2:32 PM on June 21, 2023 [7 favorites]
Scalia accepted over 70 undisclosed gifts similar to Clarence Thomas
If I got a Clarence Thomas as a gift I'd return it.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:45 PM on June 21, 2023 [26 favorites]
If I got a Clarence Thomas as a gift I'd return it.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:45 PM on June 21, 2023 [26 favorites]
How much money they make is irrelevant. Not everyone is a confused teen about money, and if they wanted to be white shoe lawyers, they could be. Few Justices leave the court other than by death, so bribes don't keep them on the court either.
They take bribes because they feel they are above the law. Same reason they rewrite standing on some cases and then play 'what did the founders really mean' on the very next. They are hacks. If they were billionaires like Trump, they would still take bribes.
posted by The_Vegetables at 2:55 PM on June 21, 2023 [12 favorites]
They take bribes because they feel they are above the law. Same reason they rewrite standing on some cases and then play 'what did the founders really mean' on the very next. They are hacks. If they were billionaires like Trump, they would still take bribes.
posted by The_Vegetables at 2:55 PM on June 21, 2023 [12 favorites]
I honestly find the implication that these 'bribes' changed their opinions on these cases at all perplexing. That is projecting. They believe what they believe, and people who believe the same thing befriend them and give them gifts. It's no deeper than that.
posted by The_Vegetables at 2:58 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by The_Vegetables at 2:58 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
For a lot of them, salary they get from the government is a pittance and most of their money comes from earnings on investment, whether that was when they were making way more at a white shoe firm, or from the shepherding of inherited wealth.
posted by Jon_Evil at 3:09 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Jon_Evil at 3:09 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
They believe what they believe, and people who believe the same thing befriend them and give them gifts. It's no deeper than that.
So you're saying it's just a limited hangout?
The doctrine that it isn't corruption if you would have done it anyway isn't really workable if you want a functioning judiciary.
posted by snuffleupagus at 3:10 PM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
So you're saying it's just a limited hangout?
The doctrine that it isn't corruption if you would have done it anyway isn't really workable if you want a functioning judiciary.
posted by snuffleupagus at 3:10 PM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
But I don't find it plausible that even a single-income household of $268k/yr is having trouble buying a house
It's not Virginia, but here in South Bay, normal houses easily run $1.5 - 2 million, $~1,000 per square foot. With taxes and insurance, thats like $11,000 per month. That's half your annual income right there, before you've even paid state and federal income taxes, social security, or CA disability. Which is close to the other half. Would you make a 2 million dollar bet on housing going up if it meant you couldn't fund your retirement accounts?
At any rate, it's a bad look for Justices to be on "we go on vacations together" terms with the people they will ostensibly have to rule against. It would almost be worse for credibility of "equal treatment under the law" if the Alito was the one paying for plaintiffs to join him on vacations.
posted by pwnguin at 3:20 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
It's not Virginia, but here in South Bay, normal houses easily run $1.5 - 2 million, $~1,000 per square foot. With taxes and insurance, thats like $11,000 per month. That's half your annual income right there, before you've even paid state and federal income taxes, social security, or CA disability. Which is close to the other half. Would you make a 2 million dollar bet on housing going up if it meant you couldn't fund your retirement accounts?
At any rate, it's a bad look for Justices to be on "we go on vacations together" terms with the people they will ostensibly have to rule against. It would almost be worse for credibility of "equal treatment under the law" if the Alito was the one paying for plaintiffs to join him on vacations.
posted by pwnguin at 3:20 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
The doctrine that it isn't corruption if you would have done it anyway isn't really workable if you want a functioning judiciary.
It's corruption because he's corrupt and because he's corrupt, our functioning judiciary is already lost. I appreciate the story confirming something we already knew, but couldn't prove.
posted by The_Vegetables at 3:27 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
It's corruption because he's corrupt and because he's corrupt, our functioning judiciary is already lost. I appreciate the story confirming something we already knew, but couldn't prove.
posted by The_Vegetables at 3:27 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
I honestly find the implication that these 'bribes' changed their opinions on these cases at all perplexing.
I get what you're saying but that's not the ethical standard we generally hold judges to in the US. For instance from the code of conduct for US judges
This standard I'm quoting from is for US judges in federal courts. The Supreme Court justices refuse to be held to this standard. Which is why they look corrupt af.
posted by Nelson at 3:39 PM on June 21, 2023 [31 favorites]
I get what you're saying but that's not the ethical standard we generally hold judges to in the US. For instance from the code of conduct for US judges
A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities ...The key here is the ethical standard is the appearance of impropriety. It's as bad to look like you could be taking bribes to change your opinion as it is to actually change your opinion in response to a bribe. Because of the harm it does to public confidence in judicial impartiality.
A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. ... Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges ... This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.
This standard I'm quoting from is for US judges in federal courts. The Supreme Court justices refuse to be held to this standard. Which is why they look corrupt af.
posted by Nelson at 3:39 PM on June 21, 2023 [31 favorites]
Judges can be corrupt without believing what these folks believe, and judges can believe what the folks believe without being corrupt. (In real world dollar terms I mean, apart from the inherent corruption of the beliefs themselves.) Turns out we get to be disgusted by these judges on two counts! Who says you can’t have double jeopardy, amirite?
posted by nickmark at 6:35 PM on June 21, 2023
posted by nickmark at 6:35 PM on June 21, 2023
It's impossible for anyone, even Alito doesn't really know.
The problem isn't so much how much he was or wasn't influenced, it's that it's impossible to prove that he wasn't. Which, of course, you completely avoid by simply never taking the bribe.
posted by VTX at 6:43 PM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
The problem isn't so much how much he was or wasn't influenced, it's that it's impossible to prove that he wasn't. Which, of course, you completely avoid by simply never taking the bribe.
posted by VTX at 6:43 PM on June 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
I get what you're saying but that's not the ethical standard we generally hold judges to in the US.
I agree that is a huge problem. All the stuff he's done would get me fired, and I'm not a judge I'm a software developer. He should be held to higher standards, but that's not written into his rules and the options for redress pass through him and his friends.
posted by The_Vegetables at 6:46 PM on June 21, 2023
I agree that is a huge problem. All the stuff he's done would get me fired, and I'm not a judge I'm a software developer. He should be held to higher standards, but that's not written into his rules and the options for redress pass through him and his friends.
posted by The_Vegetables at 6:46 PM on June 21, 2023
The intended remedy is impeachment. Which is ultimately beyond any codified standards. The Court says what the law is, the Congress says what's impeachable.
posted by snuffleupagus at 6:52 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by snuffleupagus at 6:52 PM on June 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
It's certainly very convenient that Alito was able to publish his thoughts in that WSJ space, which surely would have sat empty if not for his pre-drafted essay.
posted by kaibutsu at 9:48 PM on June 21, 2023 [20 favorites]
posted by kaibutsu at 9:48 PM on June 21, 2023 [20 favorites]
I certainly believe that Alito and Thomas would rule the way they rule regardless of the gifts, but nonetheless they should have to adhere to ethics standards. Caesar's wife must be above suspicion and the same should apply to Supreme Court inJustices.
One of the many things that chaps my hide about the Thomas and Alito matters is that they're refusing to recuse because of their ethics when so many other people in government, and not just judges, can't accept even cheap gifts because of federal ethics standards. Though clearly those two feel like they're above the rules that apply to everybody else, even the part where all they have to do is report what they took.
Another thing that really annoys me is that Alito, like Harlan Crow (he's from Dallas where I'm living so I've read quite a bit about/from him), is angry that anyone could question his integrity. Some people have lived with yes-people for so long that they legitimately are outraged that the rest of us don't act like the people who are paid to put up with their bullshit.
I used to think court-packing was a bad idea, but on the one hand we could do better with a court aligned with the number of circuits, and on the other hand, it's not like I could respect the current Chief Justice and the majority much less.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 10:22 PM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
One of the many things that chaps my hide about the Thomas and Alito matters is that they're refusing to recuse because of their ethics when so many other people in government, and not just judges, can't accept even cheap gifts because of federal ethics standards. Though clearly those two feel like they're above the rules that apply to everybody else, even the part where all they have to do is report what they took.
Another thing that really annoys me is that Alito, like Harlan Crow (he's from Dallas where I'm living so I've read quite a bit about/from him), is angry that anyone could question his integrity. Some people have lived with yes-people for so long that they legitimately are outraged that the rest of us don't act like the people who are paid to put up with their bullshit.
I used to think court-packing was a bad idea, but on the one hand we could do better with a court aligned with the number of circuits, and on the other hand, it's not like I could respect the current Chief Justice and the majority much less.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 10:22 PM on June 21, 2023 [4 favorites]
The gifts aren’t bribes, as such. The gifts are tokens to welcome the judges into the community of like-minded souls (and to keep them there in that like-mindedness), so that when the time comes, the judges rule according to their well-considered, communally-shared priors.
Anyway, imagine the outcry if, say, Elena Kagan failed to report gift travel aboard George Soros’s jet.
posted by notyou at 4:52 AM on June 22, 2023 [4 favorites]
Anyway, imagine the outcry if, say, Elena Kagan failed to report gift travel aboard George Soros’s jet.
posted by notyou at 4:52 AM on June 22, 2023 [4 favorites]
Meanwhile
A group of women who went to high school with Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan wanted to send her bagels and lox from Russ & Daughters, the legendary deli on the Lower East Side. But they scrapped the plan after Kagan expressed concerns about the court’s ethics rules for reporting gifts.posted by hydropsyche at 6:13 AM on June 22, 2023 [24 favorites]
If Samuel Alito wants to whine about being held to a lower standard than a 1950s DJ, his legacy will consist of nothing else.
He's banking on the fascists writing the history and he's the one with the finger on the button on the rigged roulette wheel
posted by any major dude at 6:55 AM on June 22, 2023 [6 favorites]
He's banking on the fascists writing the history and he's the one with the finger on the button on the rigged roulette wheel
posted by any major dude at 6:55 AM on June 22, 2023 [6 favorites]
I honestly find the implication that these 'bribes' changed their opinions on these cases at all perplexing. That is projecting. They believe what they believe, and people who believe the same thing befriend them and give them gifts. It's no deeper than that.
So you get invited to regular social outings with a hand-picked bunch of people. The people aren't picked by you (for the most part), but rather by the billionaire.
The trips are great fun. I mean, they aren't something you'd want to pay for yourself -- you wouldn't pay 50,000$ to fly on a private plane to a hunting resort in Alaska for a few days with people you don't get to pick -- but it is free to you. So it is a relaxing break.
And the entire time, you socialize with people the billionaire picked. The staff are subservient and pleasant. Almost everyone takes it for granted that the political beliefs that the billionaire loves about you are great opinions; if someone challenges you, it is out of academic fun. If the billionaire is heavily into oil and gas, the people might dismiss talking about Climate Change, or point out that solving it could be more expensive than just dealing with it, or a myriad of other ways to dismiss it as something the government should legitimately have a constitutional requirement to deal with.
You are one of them, one of the upper classes. Your interests and morals are, of course, aligned with these upstanding people who give you great gifts and spend pleasant time with you.
Then a court case shows up. On one side are the people you spend lots of time with socially and have formed great memories with -- maybe not those specific people, but the hard working executives and the like, you know, your kind of people. On the other side are the people who you only ever see at protests yelling at you, and maybe your is like your cousin which you haven't seen that often since you started your hunting in Alaska hobby.
And when you sometimes issue a ruling that isn't quite as in line with your billionaire supporters, the next time you have a free vacation maybe someone makes a joke about it or the like, implying it was a bit of a stretch. But in passing.
These billionaires are buying access. They know what they are doing.
And what is being asked is that, when they are bribed that they write down the bribes and let other people know about them. And that if someone bends the rules that they be treated with justified suspicion. And if there is a history of rule bending, that the entire process be treated with suspicion.
Let a light shine on exactly how many millions of dollars in entertainment and private flights and yacht trips and houses purchased and donated to relatives and land purchased for above market price by people with court cases summing to many millions and billions of dollars before the court be known.
And people who violated the ethical rules of the supreme court be made to step down.
And failing that, how about we just apply federal law on bribing public officials and put some justices in jail. Because if millions of dollars in unreported gifts isn't enough to get them step down from the court, I'm ok with arresting them.
posted by NotAYakk at 7:11 AM on June 22, 2023 [18 favorites]
So you get invited to regular social outings with a hand-picked bunch of people. The people aren't picked by you (for the most part), but rather by the billionaire.
The trips are great fun. I mean, they aren't something you'd want to pay for yourself -- you wouldn't pay 50,000$ to fly on a private plane to a hunting resort in Alaska for a few days with people you don't get to pick -- but it is free to you. So it is a relaxing break.
And the entire time, you socialize with people the billionaire picked. The staff are subservient and pleasant. Almost everyone takes it for granted that the political beliefs that the billionaire loves about you are great opinions; if someone challenges you, it is out of academic fun. If the billionaire is heavily into oil and gas, the people might dismiss talking about Climate Change, or point out that solving it could be more expensive than just dealing with it, or a myriad of other ways to dismiss it as something the government should legitimately have a constitutional requirement to deal with.
You are one of them, one of the upper classes. Your interests and morals are, of course, aligned with these upstanding people who give you great gifts and spend pleasant time with you.
Then a court case shows up. On one side are the people you spend lots of time with socially and have formed great memories with -- maybe not those specific people, but the hard working executives and the like, you know, your kind of people. On the other side are the people who you only ever see at protests yelling at you, and maybe your is like your cousin which you haven't seen that often since you started your hunting in Alaska hobby.
And when you sometimes issue a ruling that isn't quite as in line with your billionaire supporters, the next time you have a free vacation maybe someone makes a joke about it or the like, implying it was a bit of a stretch. But in passing.
These billionaires are buying access. They know what they are doing.
And what is being asked is that, when they are bribed that they write down the bribes and let other people know about them. And that if someone bends the rules that they be treated with justified suspicion. And if there is a history of rule bending, that the entire process be treated with suspicion.
Let a light shine on exactly how many millions of dollars in entertainment and private flights and yacht trips and houses purchased and donated to relatives and land purchased for above market price by people with court cases summing to many millions and billions of dollars before the court be known.
And people who violated the ethical rules of the supreme court be made to step down.
And failing that, how about we just apply federal law on bribing public officials and put some justices in jail. Because if millions of dollars in unreported gifts isn't enough to get them step down from the court, I'm ok with arresting them.
posted by NotAYakk at 7:11 AM on June 22, 2023 [18 favorites]
> And failing that, how about we just apply federal law on bribing public officials and put some justices in jail. Because if millions of dollars in unreported gifts isn't enough to get them step down from the court, I'm ok with arresting them.
The supremes themselves have done a good job at making this basically impossible by restricting bribes and corruptions to explicit quid-pro-quos. You have to literally say, in a way that can be proved, "if you vote X I will pay you Y". Taking someone on a dope fishing trip and letting them use your yacht, and then later saying, "this case we have coming up before you is really stressing me out, I hope the ruling goes our way" is not corruption anymore, legally speaking. It's just dudes hanging out and being bros.
posted by dis_integration at 10:04 AM on June 22, 2023 [5 favorites]
The supremes themselves have done a good job at making this basically impossible by restricting bribes and corruptions to explicit quid-pro-quos. You have to literally say, in a way that can be proved, "if you vote X I will pay you Y". Taking someone on a dope fishing trip and letting them use your yacht, and then later saying, "this case we have coming up before you is really stressing me out, I hope the ruling goes our way" is not corruption anymore, legally speaking. It's just dudes hanging out and being bros.
posted by dis_integration at 10:04 AM on June 22, 2023 [5 favorites]
From Dahlia Lithwick at Slate, "Justice Samuel Alito IS the Salmon" (emph. added):
Look again at Pro Publica’s photos of Paul Singer, Antonin Scalia, Leonard Leo and Samuel Alito and the Big Shiny Fishes they netted. If you think the fish is the trophy in this picture, you’re making a galactic category error. The trophy is the Justice. The vital question here is not why did Justice Alito agree to take the trip, because the trip sounds quite awesome. The question is why did Leo pick him to go, empty seat on the private jet notwithstanding, and why was building a friendship with someone who was in the literal business of reshaping the court to favor his own business so urgently necessary?posted by mhum at 3:58 PM on June 22, 2023 [17 favorites]
As professor Steven Lubet points out, no justice wants to believe him or herself to be a large salmon: “Justices would surely deny any such subtle influences, sincerely insisting that their judgment could never be affected by the generosity of their well-heeled friends.” But, as Lubet continues, “social science research has determined that the receipt of gifts can powerfully sway later decisions, often in ways unrealized by the recipients.” Research he cites shows that simply receiving a pen was associated with physicians increased prescription of a pharmaceutical company’s brand-name medication.
So long as we continue to think of Alito’s and Thomas’ failures to disclose expensive gifts in terms of ethical lapses, the focus stays on them. Look again at Harlan Crow’s now-infamous dogs-playing-poker portrait of himself, Leo, Mark Paoletta, and Clarence Thomas, smoking and Adirondacking, and not talking about anything that might come up before the court, ever. Why is Harlan Crow having that moment commemorated for all time in oils? A #protip that will no doubt make those justices who have been lured away to elaborate bear hunts and deer hunts and rabbit hunts and salmon hunts by wealthy oligarchs feel a bit sad: If your close personal friends who only just met you after you came onto the courts are memorializing your time together for posterity, there’s a decent chance you are, in fact, the thing being hunted.
Also, I Shouldn’t Have To Disclose That I Had Sex With A Salmon. By Samuel Alito
posted by Rumple at 8:11 PM on June 22, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by Rumple at 8:11 PM on June 22, 2023 [8 favorites]
Taking someone on a dope fishing trip and letting them use your yacht, and then later saying, "this case we have coming up before you is really stressing me out, I hope the ruling goes our way" is not corruption anymore, legally speaking. It's just dudes hanging out and being bros.
The legality is a bonus, but it's also way more effective than a quip pro quo direct bribe. You can pay someone off and get them to do something in return. But get someone emotionally on your side and they'll do you favors forever.
I work in private industry, and occasionally I get to tag along with the wining and dining that goes into winning work. (There are professional winers-and-diners who do the schmoozing full time, which seems like it would be both a great and terrible job all at once.) It's far and away most effective when you can manage to remove any hint of transactionality from the experience, and instead make it about friends having fun and bonding over a fun experience. The transaction follows organically from creating those bonds.
A low-key fishing trip is a perfect example of that. Everyone gets to relax, drink a bit too much in the evenings, have fun catching fish, and relaxing, probably with very little or no work talk at all. Everyone's hands stay clean, but yet there is still a clear payoff to the person who is buying that influence.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:34 PM on June 22, 2023 [10 favorites]
The legality is a bonus, but it's also way more effective than a quip pro quo direct bribe. You can pay someone off and get them to do something in return. But get someone emotionally on your side and they'll do you favors forever.
I work in private industry, and occasionally I get to tag along with the wining and dining that goes into winning work. (There are professional winers-and-diners who do the schmoozing full time, which seems like it would be both a great and terrible job all at once.) It's far and away most effective when you can manage to remove any hint of transactionality from the experience, and instead make it about friends having fun and bonding over a fun experience. The transaction follows organically from creating those bonds.
A low-key fishing trip is a perfect example of that. Everyone gets to relax, drink a bit too much in the evenings, have fun catching fish, and relaxing, probably with very little or no work talk at all. Everyone's hands stay clean, but yet there is still a clear payoff to the person who is buying that influence.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:34 PM on June 22, 2023 [10 favorites]
Alito in the hot seat over trips to Alaska and Rome he accepted from groups and individuals who lobby the Supreme Court.
A new thing here, a trip to Rome paid for by Notre Dame’s Religious Liberty Initiative. This is separate from the ProPublica story.
posted by Nelson at 7:37 AM on June 24, 2023 [4 favorites]
A new thing here, a trip to Rome paid for by Notre Dame’s Religious Liberty Initiative. This is separate from the ProPublica story.
After the high court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, the group paid for Alito’s trip to Rome to deliver a keynote address at a gala hosted at a palace in the heart of the city. ...The story also includes reporting on real estate sales by Barrett and Gorsuch. Also seems uncomfortably chummy but not in direct violation of requirements (unlike Alito's Alaska trip).
The practice of paying for justices to travel around the world to speak is not uncommon for well-funded legal advocacy groups and law schools seeking to fete one of the nine jurists, and the rules of the judiciary’s policy-making body, the Judicial Conference, allow for such entities to reimburse justices for expenses stemming from such travel.
posted by Nelson at 7:37 AM on June 24, 2023 [4 favorites]
Behind the Scenes of Justice Alito’s Unprecedented Wall Street Journal Pre-buttal
Bill Grueskin, a former senior editor at the Journal and a professor of journalism at Columbia, told the Times that “Justice Alito could have issued this as a statement on the SCOTUS website. But the fact that he chose The Journal — and that the editorial page was willing to serve as his loyal factotum — says a great deal about the relationship between the two parties.”posted by Nelson at 7:48 AM on June 25, 2023 [7 favorites]
I did Alito’s ethics prep for his confirmation hearing. His new excuses are nonsense.
As the chief White House ethics lawyer from 2005 to 2007, my job included screening potential Supreme Court nominees for compliance with ethics rules when they were court of appeals judges. I supervised a painstaking process of cross checking a judge’s financial holdings with every case in which the judge participated to detect any actual or apparent violation of recusal requirements under federal law. Lawyers in my office looked at other ethics issues as well, knowing that if we weren’t exacting in our scrutiny, the Senate Judiciary Committee would fill the gap and confirmation hearings could get ugly. ..... Now, 17 years later, I must ask: What happened?posted by Rumple at 12:31 PM on June 25, 2023 [6 favorites]
Samuel Alito’s Wife Leased Land to an Oil and Gas Firm While the Justice Fought the EPA. Personally I think this is a pretty tenuous conflict of interest to be concerned about. But it does highlight how wealthy property owners like Alito benefit from Supreme Court decisions like Alito's. Also Alito is apparently in denial about basic science
In 2017, Alito delivered an address at the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank, that further clarified his position on fossil fuels’ role in climate change. “Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. Carbon dioxide is not harmful to ordinary things, to human beings, or to animals, or to plants.” Alito said. “It’s actually needed for plant growth. All of us are exhaling carbon dioxide right now. So, if it’s a pollutant, we’re all polluting.”posted by Nelson at 9:27 AM on June 27, 2023 [2 favorites]
Lawyers with supreme court business paid Clarence Thomas aide via Venmo. The public Venmo feed strikes again, this time showing what is labelled "Christmas party" cash payments.
“There is no excuse for it. Thomas could invite them to his Christmas party and he could attend Christmas parties, as long as they are not discussing any cases. His Christmas party should not be paid for by lawyers,” Painter said. “A federal government employee collecting money from lawyers for any reason … I don’t see how that works.”posted by Nelson at 8:42 AM on July 12, 2023 [3 favorites]
A Federal Judge Asks: Does the Supreme Court Realize How Bad It Smells?. (Michael Posner).
All my judicial colleagues, whoever has appointed them, run into situations like these regularly, and I expect they have responded in just the same way. You don’t just stay inside the lines; you stay well inside the lines. This is not a matter of politics or judicial philosophy. It is ethics in the trenches.posted by Nelson at 7:27 AM on July 14, 2023 [2 favorites]
That Posner op-ed is very good ("Reasonable people may disagree on this. The more important, uncontroversial point is that if there will not be formal ethical constraints on our Supreme Court — or even if there will be — its justices must have functioning noses.") I was really disappointed to learn that Sotomayor has her own smelly business going on - not contributions from rich donors, fortunately, but basically running a bookselling business out of her office, pressuring organizations to buy her books and using Supreme Court staff as private labor.
(The one silver lining I can think of is that dirt being found about the liberal side of the court makes it at least more obviously ridiculous when right-wingers claim that demands for ethics reform are politically motivated.)
posted by trig at 1:49 AM on July 15, 2023 [2 favorites]
(The one silver lining I can think of is that dirt being found about the liberal side of the court makes it at least more obviously ridiculous when right-wingers claim that demands for ethics reform are politically motivated.)
posted by trig at 1:49 AM on July 15, 2023 [2 favorites]
How Harlan Crow Slashed his Tax Bill by Taking Clarence Thomas on Superyacht Cruises
Tax data obtained by ProPublica provides a glimpse of what congressional investigators would find if Crow were to open his books to them. Crow’s voyages with Thomas, the data shows, contributed to a nice side benefit: They helped reduce Crow’s tax bill. ...posted by Nelson at 7:32 AM on July 17, 2023 [3 favorites]
“Based on what information is available, this has the look of a textbook billionaire tax scam,” said Senate Finance Committee chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore. “These new details only raise more questions about Mr. Crow’s tax practices, which could begin to explain why he’s been stonewalling the Finance Committee’s investigation for months.”
I thought I'd reached maximum outrage on this corruption issue but the fact that Crow is able to a) write off his defacto personal boat generally and b) also write off the bribes specifically has racheted it up to another level.
posted by Mitheral at 4:42 PM on July 17, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Mitheral at 4:42 PM on July 17, 2023 [4 favorites]
Influential activist Leonard Leo helped fund media campaign lionizing Clarence Thomas
the rush of favorable content was part of a coordinated and sophisticated public relations campaign to defend and celebrate Thomas ... It was financed with at least $1.8 million from conservative nonprofit groups steered by the judicial activist Leonard Leo, the examination found. ...posted by Nelson at 6:51 PM on July 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Leo steered tens of thousands of dollars in consulting payments to Thomas’s wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, in 2012, The Post reported recently. He also arranged a fishing trip to Alaska for Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2008, a vacation that included a free ride on the private jet of a billionaire businessman who later had interests before the court, ProPublica reported.
« Older The love I have to give is a woman's love, if only... | What is gender-affirming care? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
This year we discovered that some people are in fact that wealthy, in no small part because the market rate for a Justice of the Supreme Court is quite low.
It's time to let Bernie Sanders write the tax code to correct the problem.
posted by ocschwar at 6:33 AM on June 21, 2023 [35 favorites]