Mystery solved.
December 18, 2023 12:42 PM Subscribe
If you've been wondering why strangers started offering gifts to Clarence Thomas without any (direct) benefit, we now know. ProPublica is reporting that it all started in early 2000, when Thomas intimated that he would quit the court.
After almost a decade on the court, Thomas had grown frustrated with his financial situation. He found himself seated next to a Republican Congressman Cliff Stearns on the flight home from an off-the-record conservative conference. The two men talked, and the lawmaker left the conversation worried that Thomas might resign.
Congress should give Supreme Court justices a pay raise, Thomas told him. If lawmakers didn’t act, “one or more justices will leave soon”. This set off a flurry of activity across the judiciary and Capitol Hill. Stearns said, “His importance as a conservative was paramount. We wanted to make sure he felt comfortable in his job and he was being paid properly.” Stearns then sought help from a lobbying firm and spread the word in conservative circles that Thomas should be supported.
ProPublica has been reporting on the gifts to Thomas for several months now. However, Thomas's dismay at his income shouldn't come as a big surprise. According to the Frontline documentary about Clarence and Ginni, Thomas was unhappy that his Yale colleagues got higher paying job offers than he did. He attributed this to the employers assuming he got in only due to affirmative action, a policy he's subsequently worked to bring down.
After almost a decade on the court, Thomas had grown frustrated with his financial situation. He found himself seated next to a Republican Congressman Cliff Stearns on the flight home from an off-the-record conservative conference. The two men talked, and the lawmaker left the conversation worried that Thomas might resign.
Congress should give Supreme Court justices a pay raise, Thomas told him. If lawmakers didn’t act, “one or more justices will leave soon”. This set off a flurry of activity across the judiciary and Capitol Hill. Stearns said, “His importance as a conservative was paramount. We wanted to make sure he felt comfortable in his job and he was being paid properly.” Stearns then sought help from a lobbying firm and spread the word in conservative circles that Thomas should be supported.
ProPublica has been reporting on the gifts to Thomas for several months now. However, Thomas's dismay at his income shouldn't come as a big surprise. According to the Frontline documentary about Clarence and Ginni, Thomas was unhappy that his Yale colleagues got higher paying job offers than he did. He attributed this to the employers assuming he got in only due to affirmative action, a policy he's subsequently worked to bring down.
(Just noting down that his complaints were about a salary "equivalent to over $300,000 today.")
posted by nobody at 12:51 PM on December 18, 2023 [51 favorites]
posted by nobody at 12:51 PM on December 18, 2023 [51 favorites]
I guess that's why Kavanaugh's debts miraculously vanished before he even took the oath of office.
posted by cmfletcher at 12:57 PM on December 18, 2023 [89 favorites]
posted by cmfletcher at 12:57 PM on December 18, 2023 [89 favorites]
Their salaries are too low: As the article notes, they are paid less than some junior associates at law firms. I doubt this would deter anyone from becoming a Justice, but other federal judges' salaries are based on that of the Supremes. We don't want only judges who can afford to take a pay cut.
(And before anyone asks, yes, that absolutely means that taking gifts is completely justified. After all, Supreme Court justices are above the rules.)
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 1:02 PM on December 18, 2023 [13 favorites]
(And before anyone asks, yes, that absolutely means that taking gifts is completely justified. After all, Supreme Court justices are above the rules.)
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 1:02 PM on December 18, 2023 [13 favorites]
This motherfucker was frustrated by his financial situation *after* borrowing more than a quarter million from a "friend" to purchase an RV. Maybe don't by an RV unless you can pay for it by your bootstraps?
posted by The Bishop of Turkey at 1:04 PM on December 18, 2023 [33 favorites]
posted by The Bishop of Turkey at 1:04 PM on December 18, 2023 [33 favorites]
I think Clarence Thomas is garbage, but that doesn't mean SCOTUS shouldn't be paid competitive salaries.
posted by BrotherCaine at 1:07 PM on December 18, 2023 [23 favorites]
posted by BrotherCaine at 1:07 PM on December 18, 2023 [23 favorites]
We don't want only judges who can afford to take a pay cut.
Anyone making more than $250K per year can afford to take a pay cut to $250K. Just stop going to Starbucks so much and eating so much avocado toast. Oh and don't buy a $250K RV.
Seriously, send your kids to public school like 90% of Americans. Drive a normal car. Live in a normal house. I am fine with the idea that federal judges should live like regular people and not like millionaires, and I'm fine with anyone who can't handle that not being a federal judge.
posted by hydropsyche at 1:08 PM on December 18, 2023 [138 favorites]
Anyone making more than $250K per year can afford to take a pay cut to $250K. Just stop going to Starbucks so much and eating so much avocado toast. Oh and don't buy a $250K RV.
Seriously, send your kids to public school like 90% of Americans. Drive a normal car. Live in a normal house. I am fine with the idea that federal judges should live like regular people and not like millionaires, and I'm fine with anyone who can't handle that not being a federal judge.
posted by hydropsyche at 1:08 PM on December 18, 2023 [138 favorites]
yeah.
"oh, my salary is so low, I can't live a decent life"
"oh you poor poor thing. come island-hop in Indonesia on my luxury yacht."
bootstraps my ass.
also - this one paragraph:
If you're concerned about expenses, maybe DON'T BORROW $267,000 FOR A HIGH-END RV.
PS: on preview, wow, bishop of turkey, hydropsyche, ESP much? :
posted by martin q blank at 1:08 PM on December 18, 2023 [26 favorites]
"oh, my salary is so low, I can't live a decent life"
"oh you poor poor thing. come island-hop in Indonesia on my luxury yacht."
bootstraps my ass.
also - this one paragraph:
After almost a decade on the court, Thomas had grown frustrated with his financial situation, according to friends. He had recently started raising his young grandnephew, and Thomas’ wife was soliciting advice on how to handle the new expenses. The month before, the justice had borrowed $267,000 from a friend to buy a high-end RV.Here's some advice, Mrs. Thomas:
If you're concerned about expenses, maybe DON'T BORROW $267,000 FOR A HIGH-END RV.
PS: on preview, wow, bishop of turkey, hydropsyche, ESP much? :
posted by martin q blank at 1:08 PM on December 18, 2023 [26 favorites]
The depths to which corruption is running in the top court in my country is a bit shocking. I think mostly because it's been happening slowly and behind the scenes, and largely because SCOTUS isn't reported on like it should be.
I really want to thank this week's episode of Strict Scrutiny for making me aware of how there are news agencies and reporters who are beginning to try to dig into what has until now been a fairly opaque part of the US government. Behind the Scenes at the Dismantling of Roe v. Wade [Archive.org link] is an example of the reporting they are beginning to do, and I hope we get a lot more of this.
posted by hippybear at 1:14 PM on December 18, 2023 [27 favorites]
I really want to thank this week's episode of Strict Scrutiny for making me aware of how there are news agencies and reporters who are beginning to try to dig into what has until now been a fairly opaque part of the US government. Behind the Scenes at the Dismantling of Roe v. Wade [Archive.org link] is an example of the reporting they are beginning to do, and I hope we get a lot more of this.
posted by hippybear at 1:14 PM on December 18, 2023 [27 favorites]
Another thing the article notes is
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 1:16 PM on December 18, 2023 [43 favorites]
When he was appointed to the court in 1991, he was 43 years old and had spent almost all his adult life working for the government. At the time, he still had student loans from law school, Thomas has said.It's interesting that his reaction to both Biden's student loan relief and to affirmative action is to try and destroy programs that were designed to help. Because they didn't help him?
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 1:16 PM on December 18, 2023 [43 favorites]
We don't want only judges who can afford to take a pay cut.
As already pointed out, 300k is still a rich person's salary, even in D.C. Personally, I don't think people who are given extreme levels of political or legal power should be extremely wealthy - I'd prefer they at be at least somewhat tethered the the economic reality of the hoi polloi. People who prefer to maximize earnings can take a job with less power.
posted by coffeecat at 1:17 PM on December 18, 2023 [66 favorites]
As already pointed out, 300k is still a rich person's salary, even in D.C. Personally, I don't think people who are given extreme levels of political or legal power should be extremely wealthy - I'd prefer they at be at least somewhat tethered the the economic reality of the hoi polloi. People who prefer to maximize earnings can take a job with less power.
posted by coffeecat at 1:17 PM on December 18, 2023 [66 favorites]
Poor baby! Him being venal does track with his pre-SC career trajectory, however.
posted by Selena777 at 1:18 PM on December 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Selena777 at 1:18 PM on December 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
…why strangers started offering gifts to Clarence Thomas without any (direct) benefit …
Could (direct) be replaced with (immediate)? These fuckers know how to play the long game.
posted by TedW at 1:28 PM on December 18, 2023 [9 favorites]
Could (direct) be replaced with (immediate)? These fuckers know how to play the long game.
posted by TedW at 1:28 PM on December 18, 2023 [9 favorites]
Public sector jobs rarely have parity with the private sector. In exchange the employee gets a government pension, healthcare, and job security. He's literally got one of the few jobs on the planet with, short of shooting the president or something, lifetime tenure.
posted by Mitheral at 1:32 PM on December 18, 2023 [32 favorites]
posted by Mitheral at 1:32 PM on December 18, 2023 [32 favorites]
He's literally got one of the few jobs on the planet with, short of shooting the president…
He probably could shoot both the president and vice president and receive a pardon from president Johnson. Whose Republican colleagues in the house would prevent any impeachment for said pardon.
posted by TedW at 1:36 PM on December 18, 2023 [12 favorites]
He probably could shoot both the president and vice president and receive a pardon from president Johnson. Whose Republican colleagues in the house would prevent any impeachment for said pardon.
posted by TedW at 1:36 PM on December 18, 2023 [12 favorites]
If you're having trouble living the same kind of high life your peers and colleagues are, and you find a way to level the playing field by getting some fancy new friends to subsidize your expensive tastes -- isn't that a kind of affirmative action?
posted by Western Infidels at 1:37 PM on December 18, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Western Infidels at 1:37 PM on December 18, 2023 [4 favorites]
How competitive salaries need to be seems beside the point. All other government officials at any level who take bribes are at risk of being imprisoned. I don't see why we allow any exceptions for justices of the Supreme Court.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 1:38 PM on December 18, 2023 [45 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 1:38 PM on December 18, 2023 [45 favorites]
Thomas "borrowed" $267K to buy that RV. The friend gave him a no-money-down 5-year interest-only loan, which was extended another 10 interest-only years at the end of the first 5 years, and then at some point during that 10 years the loan was forgiven without him ever actually paying off the principal loan amount.
posted by bassooner at 1:38 PM on December 18, 2023 [30 favorites]
posted by bassooner at 1:38 PM on December 18, 2023 [30 favorites]
I just cannot picture Thomas behind the wheel of a 'luxury RV' — an oxymoron begging to be gored if there ever was one — so I’m waiting to hear that this was merely a cover for a more complex, nefarious, and above all bigger bribe.
posted by jamjam at 1:50 PM on December 18, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by jamjam at 1:50 PM on December 18, 2023 [6 favorites]
We don't want only judges who can afford to take a pay cut.
> Seriously, send your kids to public school like 90% of Americans. Drive a normal car. Live in a normal house.
I dunno, I think on $300,000/year I could probably manage some private school and a very nice car and house.
But then again a person who takes $267K for an RV probably has a different standard for "very nice" than I do.
posted by trig at 1:51 PM on December 18, 2023 [16 favorites]
> Seriously, send your kids to public school like 90% of Americans. Drive a normal car. Live in a normal house.
I dunno, I think on $300,000/year I could probably manage some private school and a very nice car and house.
But then again a person who takes $267K for an RV probably has a different standard for "very nice" than I do.
posted by trig at 1:51 PM on December 18, 2023 [16 favorites]
Did anyone tell Justice Thomas that everyone is allowed to drive for Uber and Doordash ? Even Supreme Court justices.
posted by MonsieurPEB at 2:00 PM on December 18, 2023 [15 favorites]
posted by MonsieurPEB at 2:00 PM on December 18, 2023 [15 favorites]
Man, that is disgusting. But...
I have a lot of unsorted thoughts about this, but won't post them unless I get them sorted. I will say that my mum's best friend was chief justice in this country, and he very obviously didn't earn as much as his private sector friends. So that is normal across nations. He did live a good life, but nothing flashy, and it wasn't really important to him to be wealthy. He was a socialist.
If I were to try and understand Thomas, I'd say his perception of "the good life" is probably not compatible with being a public servant. It's easier to lead a modest life if you are already part of the elite. Not in the sense of an economic elite, as the article describes some other judges, but more of a social elite. From the outside, it can be hard to tell the difference.
posted by mumimor at 2:03 PM on December 18, 2023 [14 favorites]
I have a lot of unsorted thoughts about this, but won't post them unless I get them sorted. I will say that my mum's best friend was chief justice in this country, and he very obviously didn't earn as much as his private sector friends. So that is normal across nations. He did live a good life, but nothing flashy, and it wasn't really important to him to be wealthy. He was a socialist.
If I were to try and understand Thomas, I'd say his perception of "the good life" is probably not compatible with being a public servant. It's easier to lead a modest life if you are already part of the elite. Not in the sense of an economic elite, as the article describes some other judges, but more of a social elite. From the outside, it can be hard to tell the difference.
posted by mumimor at 2:03 PM on December 18, 2023 [14 favorites]
I think the Supreme Court justices should be paid lavishly, because that should be paired with a rigid ethics policy applying to them and their immediate family for at least five years after they leave office. No income from anyone with business before the court, investment assets are placed in a blind trust (or converted into the TSP?), etc. Assume that they’re married to another lawyer, so you’re asking the spouse to turn down a lot of corporate law positions in favor of the public sector or education. That’s inconvenient but with a big carrot you’re not going to favor wealthier candidates as much as we’ve seen in the past and paying them a million dollars a year would be so much cheaper than another Roberts court.
posted by adamsc at 2:04 PM on December 18, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by adamsc at 2:04 PM on December 18, 2023 [8 favorites]
Trickle down economics works, you guys! All it costs is ethics and being willing to sell your duties for profit. But it's ok, the Supreme Court made some ethical rules stating that bribery is completely fine
posted by Jacen at 2:07 PM on December 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by Jacen at 2:07 PM on December 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
I dunno, I think on $300,000/year I could probably manage some private school and a very nice car and house.
IDK how DC compares to south SF bay, but $300k/yr here buys you a very average house and a very average car. And your neighbor will likely be paying 1/10th the property tax, having bought two decades prior.
It's kind of amusing -- or perhaps tragic -- to think that random Silicon Valley UNIX neckbeards make more than any government employee, including Supreme Court justices and the President of the United States.
posted by pwnguin at 2:09 PM on December 18, 2023 [6 favorites]
IDK how DC compares to south SF bay, but $300k/yr here buys you a very average house and a very average car. And your neighbor will likely be paying 1/10th the property tax, having bought two decades prior.
It's kind of amusing -- or perhaps tragic -- to think that random Silicon Valley UNIX neckbeards make more than any government employee, including Supreme Court justices and the President of the United States.
posted by pwnguin at 2:09 PM on December 18, 2023 [6 favorites]
Good point, adamsc.
What I was trying to say was that someone like Thomas was/is vulnerable in the relation to the pay to play predators in a way my "uncle" wasn't. They could afford to not be rich.
posted by mumimor at 2:10 PM on December 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
What I was trying to say was that someone like Thomas was/is vulnerable in the relation to the pay to play predators in a way my "uncle" wasn't. They could afford to not be rich.
posted by mumimor at 2:10 PM on December 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
My opinion, abolish appointing 9 justices for life to the Supreme Court. Hear Supreme Court cases with a randomly drawn 9-person conference drawn from the circuit court judges. Heck they can even get a stipend for those cases based to support the extra work/travel required.
posted by msbutah at 2:11 PM on December 18, 2023 [15 favorites]
posted by msbutah at 2:11 PM on December 18, 2023 [15 favorites]
The idea that justices should be paid more is beside the point. Even if he was paid 5x as much, he would still take bribes. That's how greed works.
posted by Literaryhero at 2:12 PM on December 18, 2023 [43 favorites]
posted by Literaryhero at 2:12 PM on December 18, 2023 [43 favorites]
I just cannot picture Thomas behind the wheel of a 'luxury RV' — an oxymoron begging to be gored if there ever was one — so I’m waiting to hear that this was merely a cover for a more complex, nefarious, and above all bigger bribe.
Hmm, that's a weird take on this. Here's video from 2007 of Thomas behind the wheel of his luxury RV, if you want to update your priors on this one. (And it's 'luxury' not because it's, like, gold-plated or anything; it's 'luxury' because it costs so much and has the square footage of a small NYC apartment.)
I think the Supreme Court justices should be paid lavishly, because that should be paired with a rigid ethics policy [...] That’s inconvenient but with a big carrot you’re not going to favor wealthier candidates as much as we’ve seen in the past
What? Current salaries are nearly $300,000. You think there are less-wealthy candidates who are turning down Supreme Court nominations because they need more to get by? Who's turning down Supreme Court nominations at all?
posted by nobody at 2:16 PM on December 18, 2023 [10 favorites]
Hmm, that's a weird take on this. Here's video from 2007 of Thomas behind the wheel of his luxury RV, if you want to update your priors on this one. (And it's 'luxury' not because it's, like, gold-plated or anything; it's 'luxury' because it costs so much and has the square footage of a small NYC apartment.)
I think the Supreme Court justices should be paid lavishly, because that should be paired with a rigid ethics policy [...] That’s inconvenient but with a big carrot you’re not going to favor wealthier candidates as much as we’ve seen in the past
What? Current salaries are nearly $300,000. You think there are less-wealthy candidates who are turning down Supreme Court nominations because they need more to get by? Who's turning down Supreme Court nominations at all?
posted by nobody at 2:16 PM on December 18, 2023 [10 favorites]
We don't want only judges who can afford to take a pay cut.
Where do you want judges to come from? From the ranks of BigLaw, or from the ranks of former public interest and public defenders? Maybe we don’t want the people making and interpreting the law to be only people who would view that as a pay cut in the first place.
posted by corb at 2:19 PM on December 18, 2023 [39 favorites]
Where do you want judges to come from? From the ranks of BigLaw, or from the ranks of former public interest and public defenders? Maybe we don’t want the people making and interpreting the law to be only people who would view that as a pay cut in the first place.
posted by corb at 2:19 PM on December 18, 2023 [39 favorites]
$267,000 in 2000 is roughly $467,000 today. Is this RV gold-plated? Does he still have the RV? What happened to it and can we put it in the Smithsonian
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 2:19 PM on December 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 2:19 PM on December 18, 2023 [3 favorites]
Who are these wealthier SCOTUS candidates we've been currying favor with in the past?
posted by hippybear at 2:20 PM on December 18, 2023
posted by hippybear at 2:20 PM on December 18, 2023
The issue of parity between what people can earn in public service relative to the private sector is real and one of the things (in my opinion, of course) that leads to having people in positions of immense power that don't have the skills to build a successful career in the private sector. I'm certainly not saying that anyone deserves to be paid millions no matter what job they're doing, but the market for high-level positions in both public and private organisations should be competitive so as to attract the best and brightest into those positions of power.
The result of people having to make huge financial sacrifices in order to pursue a career in the public sector is that we end up with a combination of the dullest minds and the most unearned wealth. That's a dangerous combination and *waves arms around* this is what we got. This also applies to politicians of all stripes. We are mostly led by those whose personality far exceeds their competence.
Regardless of that, there's no way a Supreme Court judge should be allowed to accept massive gifts like this. It's not possible to not be swayed by those gifts no matter how much they try and convince themselves they can be impartial when ruling on matters that could adversely impact the people that prop up their lifestyle (which is, obviously, why they are giving him the gifts). It's just human nature.
posted by dg at 2:22 PM on December 18, 2023 [7 favorites]
The result of people having to make huge financial sacrifices in order to pursue a career in the public sector is that we end up with a combination of the dullest minds and the most unearned wealth. That's a dangerous combination and *waves arms around* this is what we got. This also applies to politicians of all stripes. We are mostly led by those whose personality far exceeds their competence.
Regardless of that, there's no way a Supreme Court judge should be allowed to accept massive gifts like this. It's not possible to not be swayed by those gifts no matter how much they try and convince themselves they can be impartial when ruling on matters that could adversely impact the people that prop up their lifestyle (which is, obviously, why they are giving him the gifts). It's just human nature.
posted by dg at 2:22 PM on December 18, 2023 [7 favorites]
It's also possible we end up with people in public service with integrity and ethics who don't feel the need to be ridiculously wealthy? Because those people exist?
posted by hydropsyche at 2:25 PM on December 18, 2023 [26 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 2:25 PM on December 18, 2023 [26 favorites]
Does he still have the RV? What happened to it and can we put it in the Smithsonian
A version of my first car - a 1986 Plymouth Voyager minivan - is in the Smithsonian. And I'm not even a Supreme Court Justice!
posted by grumpybear69 at 2:30 PM on December 18, 2023 [5 favorites]
A version of my first car - a 1986 Plymouth Voyager minivan - is in the Smithsonian. And I'm not even a Supreme Court Justice!
posted by grumpybear69 at 2:30 PM on December 18, 2023 [5 favorites]
Just some stray thoughts:
[1] $300,000 per year is already lavish. It's four times the real median household income in the U.S.
[2] Any justice who isn't happy with the pay is free to quit. It's called public service for a reason.
[3] Our system would probably be better, not worse, if justices occasionally resigned in order to pursue better financial options.
[4] The remedy for a problem with pay -- which I do not agree currently exists, see [1], [2], and [3] -- is legislative. The fact that pay isn't raised legislatively does not provide a license to solicit or to accept bribes. (Nor does it make it okay for people to offer bribes.)
[5] Thomas' actions are criminal. His multiple, repeated failures to disclose shows consciousness of guilt. He should be prosecuted, impeached, and removed, not necessarily in that order.
[6] The Supreme Court cannot be left to regulate itself. We need actual oversight.
[7] The Founders sucked at writing Constitutional provisions regarding courts and at foreseeing what kinds of damage their lack of concern with the courts might have down the line.
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 2:44 PM on December 18, 2023 [61 favorites]
[1] $300,000 per year is already lavish. It's four times the real median household income in the U.S.
[2] Any justice who isn't happy with the pay is free to quit. It's called public service for a reason.
[3] Our system would probably be better, not worse, if justices occasionally resigned in order to pursue better financial options.
[4] The remedy for a problem with pay -- which I do not agree currently exists, see [1], [2], and [3] -- is legislative. The fact that pay isn't raised legislatively does not provide a license to solicit or to accept bribes. (Nor does it make it okay for people to offer bribes.)
[5] Thomas' actions are criminal. His multiple, repeated failures to disclose shows consciousness of guilt. He should be prosecuted, impeached, and removed, not necessarily in that order.
[6] The Supreme Court cannot be left to regulate itself. We need actual oversight.
[7] The Founders sucked at writing Constitutional provisions regarding courts and at foreseeing what kinds of damage their lack of concern with the courts might have down the line.
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 2:44 PM on December 18, 2023 [61 favorites]
The result of people having to make huge financial sacrifices in order to pursue a career in the public sector is that we end up with a combination of the dullest minds and the most unearned wealth.
As a public sector lawyer, fuck that take. I spent years at a white shoe firm doing work I didn't enjoy and am not proud of. Most of my current colleagues have a similar backstory. How about we talk insane student debt levels that require grads to make a huge moral sacrifice to pay it off?
posted by ZaphodB at 2:59 PM on December 18, 2023 [76 favorites]
As a public sector lawyer, fuck that take. I spent years at a white shoe firm doing work I didn't enjoy and am not proud of. Most of my current colleagues have a similar backstory. How about we talk insane student debt levels that require grads to make a huge moral sacrifice to pay it off?
posted by ZaphodB at 2:59 PM on December 18, 2023 [76 favorites]
Instead of raising supreme court salaries, just increase tax progressivity, so making $300k is basically the same as making $500k or whatever.
posted by ropeladder at 3:21 PM on December 18, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by ropeladder at 3:21 PM on December 18, 2023 [10 favorites]
If it is what it takes, I, who is but a humble scientist completely unqualified to serve as a judge, will accept this burden and make the Ultimate Financial Sacrifice by taking on the position of Supreme Court Justice of the United States of America for the low salary of $300k/year.
Especially if it entails as little work as judge "don't ask questions from the bench for 10 years" has done for his bribes.
posted by The Bishop of Turkey at 3:24 PM on December 18, 2023 [25 favorites]
Especially if it entails as little work as judge "don't ask questions from the bench for 10 years" has done for his bribes.
posted by The Bishop of Turkey at 3:24 PM on December 18, 2023 [25 favorites]
When I worked in the non- profit sector, we lost ton of great employees to private firms that paid 2x-3x what we could. I don’t fault anyone with student loans to pay off, trying to buy a house or any other final goals taking a hirie paying job.But no one was taking bribes or embezzling
It can true that we underpay federal judges and that Justice Thomas is corrupt AF. Higher pay wouldn’t have fixed Thomas’ complete lack of moral compass
posted by CostcoCultist at 3:29 PM on December 18, 2023 [10 favorites]
It can true that we underpay federal judges and that Justice Thomas is corrupt AF. Higher pay wouldn’t have fixed Thomas’ complete lack of moral compass
posted by CostcoCultist at 3:29 PM on December 18, 2023 [10 favorites]
So this isn't just Clarence Thomas taking bribes, it's Clarence Thomas extorting the Republican party with the threat of putting a Supreme Court seat into play when they're not in power.
That's... kind of hilarious. I mean, dystopic and horrifying, certainly, but funny.
posted by MrVisible at 3:35 PM on December 18, 2023 [46 favorites]
That's... kind of hilarious. I mean, dystopic and horrifying, certainly, but funny.
posted by MrVisible at 3:35 PM on December 18, 2023 [46 favorites]
I mean obviously the solution is to tax individuals and corporations to the point where it’s not sensible to pay someone $300,000 out of law school. I have been in non-FAANG tech for 25 years and before that was an honors student at a competitive law school where I hobnobbed with the folks that ended up in the big corporate firms. Also as a junior executive in a Fortune 500 firm I still don’t make 300k. Anyway the law students I knew:They were generally moderately smart, but not Cal Tech physics smart, and they just went where our sick system nudged them. Not to mention that a lot of the work they do (mergers and acquisitions, say) would not be needed if we had a better regulatory state where companies couldn’t suck all the fucking air out of the economy by growing to a stupid extreme. I mean a good friend worked on the original Time - Warner deal and at the time people said THAT was a bridge too far. How far we’ve fallen.
And Clarence Thomas sucks, and we don’t need to pay a zillion dollars for the best and brightest. They’re waiting tables in every restaurant and working in every dead end mid level corporate job.
Next let’s talk about how bullshit “quants” are.
posted by caviar2d2 at 3:41 PM on December 18, 2023 [14 favorites]
And Clarence Thomas sucks, and we don’t need to pay a zillion dollars for the best and brightest. They’re waiting tables in every restaurant and working in every dead end mid level corporate job.
Next let’s talk about how bullshit “quants” are.
posted by caviar2d2 at 3:41 PM on December 18, 2023 [14 favorites]
Mod note: One comment removed - I appreciate that this man is noxious but please do not make idle "how to get him out of the way" comments.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 4:54 PM on December 18, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 4:54 PM on December 18, 2023 [7 favorites]
At the time of his confirmation, I remember a couple of things:
-Anita Hill. So many women said, ' I know him. He would never do that kind of thing.' You could say the same thing of me, unless you asked the right women...
-G. H. W. Bush saying that he was the person most qualified for the job. I thought at the time that Judge Wapner was more qualified.
-Someone, Orrin Hatch?? saying that Thomas had been fast-tracked for the Supreme Court. That really burned me up. How does one get a fast-track gig?
posted by MtDewd at 4:59 PM on December 18, 2023 [4 favorites]
-Anita Hill. So many women said, ' I know him. He would never do that kind of thing.' You could say the same thing of me, unless you asked the right women...
-G. H. W. Bush saying that he was the person most qualified for the job. I thought at the time that Judge Wapner was more qualified.
-Someone, Orrin Hatch?? saying that Thomas had been fast-tracked for the Supreme Court. That really burned me up. How does one get a fast-track gig?
posted by MtDewd at 4:59 PM on December 18, 2023 [4 favorites]
$267,000 in 2000 is roughly $467,000 today. Is this RV gold-plated? Does he still have the RV?
So I was curious about that, and it looks like $500k will buy you a second-tier luxury RV. The top-tier models go for ~$1.5M.
posted by mr_roboto at 5:19 PM on December 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
So I was curious about that, and it looks like $500k will buy you a second-tier luxury RV. The top-tier models go for ~$1.5M.
posted by mr_roboto at 5:19 PM on December 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
Anyone making more than $250K per year can afford to take a pay cut to $250K.
The fact that they can go make triple (or more? I don't know) at any private law firm they want doesn't go away.
So you're setting up a scenario where judges can be easily tempted by bribes because of that massive mismatch or if they're not susceptible to bribes it's because they have so much private wealth they it doesn't really matter much.
I don't like either of those options so how about we pay all Federal employees competitive salaries?
I'm not happy about it but it's easier to pay supreme court judges more than it is to dramatically close US wealth disparity.
FWIW, I also think the judiciary should be like an order of magnitude larger and have the resources to provide citizens with whatever legal assistance they need so people don't go bankrupt proving their innocence (or even over charged and over sentenced for stuff they're totally guilty of) and have speedy trials that are actually speedy and thorough. A bunch of other stuff too if I really stopped to think about it. But until I come to power....
posted by VTX at 5:25 PM on December 18, 2023 [8 favorites]
The fact that they can go make triple (or more? I don't know) at any private law firm they want doesn't go away.
So you're setting up a scenario where judges can be easily tempted by bribes because of that massive mismatch or if they're not susceptible to bribes it's because they have so much private wealth they it doesn't really matter much.
I don't like either of those options so how about we pay all Federal employees competitive salaries?
I'm not happy about it but it's easier to pay supreme court judges more than it is to dramatically close US wealth disparity.
FWIW, I also think the judiciary should be like an order of magnitude larger and have the resources to provide citizens with whatever legal assistance they need so people don't go bankrupt proving their innocence (or even over charged and over sentenced for stuff they're totally guilty of) and have speedy trials that are actually speedy and thorough. A bunch of other stuff too if I really stopped to think about it. But until I come to power....
posted by VTX at 5:25 PM on December 18, 2023 [8 favorites]
Is this RV gold-plated? Does he still have the RV? What happened to it and can we put it in the Smithsonian
Looks like it's a coach conversion. It's easy to drop half a million or more on a current one.
It's kind of amusing -- or perhaps tragic -- to think that random Silicon Valley UNIX neckbeards make more than any government employee, including Supreme Court justices and the President of the United States.
The highest paid public employees are hands down sport coaches some of whom make millions a year.
posted by Mitheral at 5:25 PM on December 18, 2023 [11 favorites]
Looks like it's a coach conversion. It's easy to drop half a million or more on a current one.
It's kind of amusing -- or perhaps tragic -- to think that random Silicon Valley UNIX neckbeards make more than any government employee, including Supreme Court justices and the President of the United States.
The highest paid public employees are hands down sport coaches some of whom make millions a year.
posted by Mitheral at 5:25 PM on December 18, 2023 [11 favorites]
The highest paid public employees are hands down sport coaches
It was actually a big deal in 1929 when Babe Ruth got paid more than the US President (Hoover).
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:54 PM on December 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
It was actually a big deal in 1929 when Babe Ruth got paid more than the US President (Hoover).
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:54 PM on December 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
So you're setting up a scenario where judges can be easily tempted by bribes because of that massive mismatch or if they're not susceptible to bribes it's because they have so much private wealth they it doesn't really matter much
That's a good false dilemma. Another possibility: it's because they feel that 300K - much more than most Americans will ever come close to earning, even in expensive cities like DC - is a perfectly comfortable wage, and that the satisfaction of having more influence than almost anyone alive is fine compensation for not showing up at their law school reunion with the flashiest car and accessories.
I know it's hard to imagine, but there are people for whom the concept of "rich enough" exists. And there are people who are willing to trade wealth for power (whether to do good or bad). And, since at 300K this is not actually about financial comfort but about keeping up with the Joneses, there are also people who are satisfied with the status of holding one of the most elite positions in the world over the status of having the biggest house.
I'm familiar with the argument that less money means less talent, but there are a lot of brilliant people working by choice for far less than they could earn elsewhere, and many of them aren't independently wealthy. And on the flip side, it's not clear that the most highly-paid people are the most competent or brilliant. I definitely don't think Clarence Thomas is a good example of "is so brilliant they should be paid hundreds of thousands more to keep them on the Court, because otherwise what a loss for the country." (Is brilliance even desirable, to the GOP?)
posted by trig at 6:14 PM on December 18, 2023 [18 favorites]
That's a good false dilemma. Another possibility: it's because they feel that 300K - much more than most Americans will ever come close to earning, even in expensive cities like DC - is a perfectly comfortable wage, and that the satisfaction of having more influence than almost anyone alive is fine compensation for not showing up at their law school reunion with the flashiest car and accessories.
I know it's hard to imagine, but there are people for whom the concept of "rich enough" exists. And there are people who are willing to trade wealth for power (whether to do good or bad). And, since at 300K this is not actually about financial comfort but about keeping up with the Joneses, there are also people who are satisfied with the status of holding one of the most elite positions in the world over the status of having the biggest house.
I'm familiar with the argument that less money means less talent, but there are a lot of brilliant people working by choice for far less than they could earn elsewhere, and many of them aren't independently wealthy. And on the flip side, it's not clear that the most highly-paid people are the most competent or brilliant. I definitely don't think Clarence Thomas is a good example of "is so brilliant they should be paid hundreds of thousands more to keep them on the Court, because otherwise what a loss for the country." (Is brilliance even desirable, to the GOP?)
posted by trig at 6:14 PM on December 18, 2023 [18 favorites]
I guess that's why Kavanaugh's debts miraculously vanished before he even took the oath of office.
No. His dad got a mid 8 figure payout when he retired from his DC Lobbying firm right before that. Since gifts between family members of any amount don’t need to be reported that why it never showed up on any of the forms.
Kavanaugh likes to play he’s a self made man, but his family is deeply connected to the Washington elite and fabulously wealthy.
posted by jmauro at 6:19 PM on December 18, 2023 [15 favorites]
No. His dad got a mid 8 figure payout when he retired from his DC Lobbying firm right before that. Since gifts between family members of any amount don’t need to be reported that why it never showed up on any of the forms.
Kavanaugh likes to play he’s a self made man, but his family is deeply connected to the Washington elite and fabulously wealthy.
posted by jmauro at 6:19 PM on December 18, 2023 [15 favorites]
The result of people having to make huge financial sacrifices in order to pursue a career in the public sector is that we end up with a combination of the dullest minds and the most unearned wealth.
As a public sector lawyer, fuck that take.
I absolutely was not intending to suggest that all or even most people working in the public sector meet my description and they clearly don't. I can see how my comment read that way and I apologise for that.
As a (former) long-term public servant, I have observed that as you look upward to the highest levels of public servant, the proportion of people who are committed, competent and ethical decreases. This observation aligns with (in the areas of my experience - other countries may differ) where salaries cross over in comparison to the private sector. At lower levels, total remuneration in the public sector is quite a lot better than the private sector but, the higher the level of a position, the more that gap closes until, at higher levels, total remuneration is usually quite a bit lower. People being what they are, there is more financial incentive to move to the private sector at those levels and more freedom to act in ways that are restricted in the public sector (mostly for good reason).
There is also a crossover in job security and, once you reach a certain level in the public service, you become susceptible to being dismissed for political reasons (ask me how I know) where lower levels have very high job security generally. Once you reach that crossover, taking away job security removes one of the incentives for staying in the public sector for people who can move to private jobs at much higher remuneration.
My experience is that the overwhelming majority of people working in the public service are dedicated to working for the common good and work hard towards the goals of their agency. These people are also willing to accept that avoiding potential or perceived conflicts of interest is an absolute mandate. For a person holding a position of such enormous power as Thomas to accept 'gifts' in the way the article describes is absolutely unacceptable in every possible way and amounts to serious corruption. It harms the reputation of every single public servant and makes any judgment he is involved in suspicious.
posted by dg at 6:29 PM on December 18, 2023 [8 favorites]
As a public sector lawyer, fuck that take.
I absolutely was not intending to suggest that all or even most people working in the public sector meet my description and they clearly don't. I can see how my comment read that way and I apologise for that.
As a (former) long-term public servant, I have observed that as you look upward to the highest levels of public servant, the proportion of people who are committed, competent and ethical decreases. This observation aligns with (in the areas of my experience - other countries may differ) where salaries cross over in comparison to the private sector. At lower levels, total remuneration in the public sector is quite a lot better than the private sector but, the higher the level of a position, the more that gap closes until, at higher levels, total remuneration is usually quite a bit lower. People being what they are, there is more financial incentive to move to the private sector at those levels and more freedom to act in ways that are restricted in the public sector (mostly for good reason).
There is also a crossover in job security and, once you reach a certain level in the public service, you become susceptible to being dismissed for political reasons (ask me how I know) where lower levels have very high job security generally. Once you reach that crossover, taking away job security removes one of the incentives for staying in the public sector for people who can move to private jobs at much higher remuneration.
My experience is that the overwhelming majority of people working in the public service are dedicated to working for the common good and work hard towards the goals of their agency. These people are also willing to accept that avoiding potential or perceived conflicts of interest is an absolute mandate. For a person holding a position of such enormous power as Thomas to accept 'gifts' in the way the article describes is absolutely unacceptable in every possible way and amounts to serious corruption. It harms the reputation of every single public servant and makes any judgment he is involved in suspicious.
posted by dg at 6:29 PM on December 18, 2023 [8 favorites]
It's not about talent, it's about susceptibility to influence. As we can see clearly happened with our buddy Clarence. I mean, don't nominate conservative fascist dipshits, absolutely, but that risk is still there and it can be mitigated by paying competitive wages.
I think it's horseshit that a competitive salary for someone with the kind of experience that a supreme court nominee typically has is so damn high but that's a totally unrelated problem.
For all we know the liberal judges do similar stuff they're just more subtle about it and rationalize it differently.
Going down as far down the chain as public defenders. The folks that are dedicated to their jobs in spite of a lack of competitive deserve competitive salaries too!
posted by VTX at 6:43 PM on December 18, 2023 [6 favorites]
I think it's horseshit that a competitive salary for someone with the kind of experience that a supreme court nominee typically has is so damn high but that's a totally unrelated problem.
For all we know the liberal judges do similar stuff they're just more subtle about it and rationalize it differently.
Going down as far down the chain as public defenders. The folks that are dedicated to their jobs in spite of a lack of competitive deserve competitive salaries too!
posted by VTX at 6:43 PM on December 18, 2023 [6 favorites]
Take the generous salary, the fact that if you retire after 10-15 years you get that salary yearly until you die, sterling health care, three months vacation every year, no worries whatsoever about job performance / tenure, and the prestige that comes with the office, I see absolutely no way that justices are under-compensated.
posted by Ickster at 6:51 PM on December 18, 2023 [27 favorites]
posted by Ickster at 6:51 PM on December 18, 2023 [27 favorites]
I am fucking astounded at the number of people here who seem to seriously believe that "pay them more" is a real possible fix for this - clearly you have never read any other news story ever about corruption of public officials. Because time and time and time again, they're fucking pikers, fucking jokes. They're trading $25 million dollar state construction contracts for getting a $5000 retaining wall built for free, they're giving $50k a year jobs to someone's cousin in exchange for a $1000 foot massage in Vegas.
It's not about the money, it's never about the money, it's about power and influence and ego. They think because they've landed this position of power they have the right to pull one over on the rest of us. If it was about the money we wouldn't have all these shnooks going to jail over discounts on their in-ground pool.
We know Thomas is a fucking liar, don't you fucking believe a word of his complaints about money, it's all about the things he thinks he's rightfully due as a Master of the Universe, more money would never be enough for him or anyone else who sees their government job as a license to steal.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:42 PM on December 18, 2023 [75 favorites]
It's not about the money, it's never about the money, it's about power and influence and ego. They think because they've landed this position of power they have the right to pull one over on the rest of us. If it was about the money we wouldn't have all these shnooks going to jail over discounts on their in-ground pool.
We know Thomas is a fucking liar, don't you fucking believe a word of his complaints about money, it's all about the things he thinks he's rightfully due as a Master of the Universe, more money would never be enough for him or anyone else who sees their government job as a license to steal.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:42 PM on December 18, 2023 [75 favorites]
A version of my first car - a 1986 Plymouth Voyager minivan - is in the Smithsonian
I mean, not every US automobile model was deployed on a 10+ year mission to survey Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune
posted by pullayup at 7:46 PM on December 18, 2023 [9 favorites]
I mean, not every US automobile model was deployed on a 10+ year mission to survey Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune
posted by pullayup at 7:46 PM on December 18, 2023 [9 favorites]
Wait, I thought the Voyager was accidentally sent into the Delta Quadrant and spent years trying to get back? Maybe I'm confused.
Either way, it does deserve a place in a museum.
posted by hippybear at 7:54 PM on December 18, 2023 [6 favorites]
Either way, it does deserve a place in a museum.
posted by hippybear at 7:54 PM on December 18, 2023 [6 favorites]
Thanks soundguy99, flagged as fantastic.
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 8:16 PM on December 18, 2023
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 8:16 PM on December 18, 2023
first you get the power then the money.
no
first you get the money then the power.
wait once you have money and power
desire for more.
it's about desire.
I see justice Soto recieved a 499$ first edition of a law book
scandalous, absolutely.
Clarence is all, I need to get out of town, I need a jet plane ride, I need stock in Alka Seltzer piped soothe for the allied supreme, it's just fun stuff and dinners on me.
it's not like he wanted a bunker.
posted by clavdivs at 8:34 PM on December 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
no
first you get the money then the power.
wait once you have money and power
desire for more.
it's about desire.
I see justice Soto recieved a 499$ first edition of a law book
scandalous, absolutely.
Clarence is all, I need to get out of town, I need a jet plane ride, I need stock in Alka Seltzer piped soothe for the allied supreme, it's just fun stuff and dinners on me.
it's not like he wanted a bunker.
posted by clavdivs at 8:34 PM on December 18, 2023 [1 favorite]
At that level of influence you ideally want a compensation level such that people wouldn't pursue the job just for the pay, but also wouldn't be discontent about it compared to what they could make elsewhere. And you need to adjust upwards, because they should not have other income and should accept scrutiny to that effect (this would therefore exclude people who are always discontent and insecure, like Thomas).
I mean, among 330M people we've selected nine ultra-cops with lifetime appointments? Frankly, I'd be okay with $10M salaries if they wore 24/7 body cameras. Maybe require a two-thirds vote in both houses of congress if you want to uncensor their bathroom footage (we already have audio of Breyer, so let's not stand on decorum).
posted by Riki tiki at 9:51 PM on December 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
I mean, among 330M people we've selected nine ultra-cops with lifetime appointments? Frankly, I'd be okay with $10M salaries if they wore 24/7 body cameras. Maybe require a two-thirds vote in both houses of congress if you want to uncensor their bathroom footage (we already have audio of Breyer, so let's not stand on decorum).
posted by Riki tiki at 9:51 PM on December 18, 2023 [2 favorites]
Basically, the problem isn't with compensation. The problem is that we have a 40-year program of the Federalist Society pushing grifters for seats on the court and a corrupt GOP marching in lock step with the grift.
posted by Ickster at 10:05 PM on December 18, 2023 [22 favorites]
posted by Ickster at 10:05 PM on December 18, 2023 [22 favorites]
It's not about the money, it's never about the money, it's about power and influence and ego.
Yeah the public sector pay concern is legitimate in the general case in many fields but when it comes to the Supreme Court it feels a bit beside the point. That’s a job that is not like other jobs.
posted by atoxyl at 10:15 PM on December 18, 2023 [10 favorites]
Yeah the public sector pay concern is legitimate in the general case in many fields but when it comes to the Supreme Court it feels a bit beside the point. That’s a job that is not like other jobs.
posted by atoxyl at 10:15 PM on December 18, 2023 [10 favorites]
hear me out - what if we paid private practice lawyers and also corpo CEOs and mid-management way less
like what if we made any kind of executive leadership out to be the shittiest of the jobs - the one nobody wants, the hairshirt, and paid shittily to boot! you might think it's kinda unfair but yeah, they don't get jackshit because they don't actually make anything at all, all they're doing is telling someone to tell someone to tell someone to do something. and you know what, even when they're up there telling us what to do they're wrong 50% of the gd time! so yeah maybe they get what they deserve
accordingly, the well-connected BigLaw bureaucrats on financial retainer for the rich should also paid shit wages because their work benefits the least number of people (literally just individuals sometimes?). and for the Bureaucrat Supremes maybe instead of paying them a ton, maybe since they're making decisions for 300+ million people, maybe their salary is commensurate to some kind of hard stat. a good example of that would be like if you made a decision affecting maternal health, maybe if the maternal mortality rates go up afterwards, maybe you don't get jack shit! instead, maybe you just get retired on the spot, even
like oof, bud, this really wasn't the right role for you, huh? but if you think about it, maybe this is actually really kind and fair to you because if you were prosecuted in some horrible dystopian world, you'd be getting 20 fatal ccs of the most painful nerve ripping chem-mixes because you practically straight up murdered a whole shit ton of people back there! so it's kinda nice that you just have to live in shame for the rest of your life if you think about it
posted by paimapi at 10:25 PM on December 18, 2023 [5 favorites]
like what if we made any kind of executive leadership out to be the shittiest of the jobs - the one nobody wants, the hairshirt, and paid shittily to boot! you might think it's kinda unfair but yeah, they don't get jackshit because they don't actually make anything at all, all they're doing is telling someone to tell someone to tell someone to do something. and you know what, even when they're up there telling us what to do they're wrong 50% of the gd time! so yeah maybe they get what they deserve
accordingly, the well-connected BigLaw bureaucrats on financial retainer for the rich should also paid shit wages because their work benefits the least number of people (literally just individuals sometimes?). and for the Bureaucrat Supremes maybe instead of paying them a ton, maybe since they're making decisions for 300+ million people, maybe their salary is commensurate to some kind of hard stat. a good example of that would be like if you made a decision affecting maternal health, maybe if the maternal mortality rates go up afterwards, maybe you don't get jack shit! instead, maybe you just get retired on the spot, even
like oof, bud, this really wasn't the right role for you, huh? but if you think about it, maybe this is actually really kind and fair to you because if you were prosecuted in some horrible dystopian world, you'd be getting 20 fatal ccs of the most painful nerve ripping chem-mixes because you practically straight up murdered a whole shit ton of people back there! so it's kinda nice that you just have to live in shame for the rest of your life if you think about it
posted by paimapi at 10:25 PM on December 18, 2023 [5 favorites]
As a (former) long-term public servant, I have observed that as you look upward to the highest levels of public servant, the proportion of people who are committed, competent and ethical decreases.
This is true in the private sector as well. It doesn't matter how steep the pay gradient is, or how eye-watering the figures at the top, it is almost always true that the higher up the org chart you go, the more the proportion of people who are committed, competent, and ethical decreases.
The fact that they can go make triple (or more? I don't know) at any private law firm they want doesn't go away.
So you're setting up a scenario where judges can be easily tempted by bribes because of that massive mismatch or if they're not susceptible to bribes it's because they have so much private wealth they it doesn't really matter much.
I don't understand how my pay relative to other people's is why I might take bribes. If 300k is enough, it is enough. If it is not, it is not. How Bob next door is paid is neither here nor there. Nobody who is taking bribes is doing it because their mate is better paid than them, and making sure they're better paid than their mates isn't going to make them stop.
posted by Dysk at 11:18 PM on December 18, 2023 [7 favorites]
This is true in the private sector as well. It doesn't matter how steep the pay gradient is, or how eye-watering the figures at the top, it is almost always true that the higher up the org chart you go, the more the proportion of people who are committed, competent, and ethical decreases.
The fact that they can go make triple (or more? I don't know) at any private law firm they want doesn't go away.
So you're setting up a scenario where judges can be easily tempted by bribes because of that massive mismatch or if they're not susceptible to bribes it's because they have so much private wealth they it doesn't really matter much.
I don't understand how my pay relative to other people's is why I might take bribes. If 300k is enough, it is enough. If it is not, it is not. How Bob next door is paid is neither here nor there. Nobody who is taking bribes is doing it because their mate is better paid than them, and making sure they're better paid than their mates isn't going to make them stop.
posted by Dysk at 11:18 PM on December 18, 2023 [7 favorites]
Also like, maybe setting up some systems of oversight to address the issue of 'can they take bribes' and the to-the-exclusion-of-all-else laser-focus on 'do they want to take bribes' becomes unnecessary. If getting caught taking a bribe meant the end of your career, jail time, criminal record, etc, and it was likely you'd get caught if you tried it, you might see fewer bribes. As a bonus, you'd be able to actually do something about it when it happened, as opposed to now where that's happening is shrugging and suggestions that maybe the state should bid higher in the supreme-court-influence-buying market.
posted by Dysk at 11:23 PM on December 18, 2023 [15 favorites]
posted by Dysk at 11:23 PM on December 18, 2023 [15 favorites]
For all we know the liberal judges do similar stuff they're just more subtle about it and rationalize it differently.
Anyone really think the Koch's and Theil's out there a) aren't pouring thousands of dollars into investigators looking for this right now and b) would keep quiet about it if they found anything?
The fact is one party is appointing judges who are good judges and the other party is appointing judges who will amongst other things toe the line of big business and influence peddling/corruption. You don't see these scandals on one side because that side values people who don't act in scandalous ways.
posted by Mitheral at 4:26 AM on December 19, 2023 [11 favorites]
Anyone really think the Koch's and Theil's out there a) aren't pouring thousands of dollars into investigators looking for this right now and b) would keep quiet about it if they found anything?
The fact is one party is appointing judges who are good judges and the other party is appointing judges who will amongst other things toe the line of big business and influence peddling/corruption. You don't see these scandals on one side because that side values people who don't act in scandalous ways.
posted by Mitheral at 4:26 AM on December 19, 2023 [11 favorites]
In my opinion lavish spending on the elite does not recede corruption as much as it relabels it to hush the petite bourgeoisie and misdirect the rest of us.
Keep them connected with reality. Minimum wage would be a place to start plus health insurance. Minimum wage was to let a person live with dignity if they had a job full time. And put a 20 year limit on it so that after they are done judging everyone they can use what respect they have left to better the end of their lives.
Let's get back to keep the dignity of the bench. If you want to be rich as a judge I prefer you be rich before you get there so that we can see what the rich you is made of, OK ?
posted by MonsieurPEB at 5:22 AM on December 19, 2023 [2 favorites]
Keep them connected with reality. Minimum wage would be a place to start plus health insurance. Minimum wage was to let a person live with dignity if they had a job full time. And put a 20 year limit on it so that after they are done judging everyone they can use what respect they have left to better the end of their lives.
Let's get back to keep the dignity of the bench. If you want to be rich as a judge I prefer you be rich before you get there so that we can see what the rich you is made of, OK ?
posted by MonsieurPEB at 5:22 AM on December 19, 2023 [2 favorites]
Well, when I take over, after a LOT of rich people get guillotined, and the Constitution thoroughly amended to get rid of the Senate, the Electoral College and lifetime tenure for anybody, income is getting capped at $500k adjusted for inflation and wealth above adjusted $5M taxed at 10% per annum, so none of this sort of corruption will be quite such a big deal anymore.
That said, Thomas is one of the worst political actors of the last century and the only thing that astonishes me about any of this is just how small-time and venal he is.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:50 AM on December 19, 2023 [1 favorite]
That said, Thomas is one of the worst political actors of the last century and the only thing that astonishes me about any of this is just how small-time and venal he is.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:50 AM on December 19, 2023 [1 favorite]
I don't understand how my pay relative to other people's is why I might take bribes.
Because people are human and susceptible to envy, greed, and social pressure. And when you put a person in a position of huge influence and power, but surround them by people who have lavish lifestyles and immense wealth, you create a scenario where they're constantly having things they can't afford paraded in front of them and temptation to bend the rules for a taste of what they see as a better life.
Thomas is a creep. He was a creep before he became a Supreme Court Justice and I doubt that he was heavily influenced by all the money and trips and whatnot. That is to say – I'm not aware of any rulings that were out of character for him anyway, though perhaps he employed some extra mental gymnastics to get to the conclusion his patrons wanted on really awful rulings.
But, consider for a moment: Take someone who is presumed to be at the very very top of their game, a legal mind that is so exceptional they're given a position at the highest court in the land for life. Their rulings shape society. And yet, they're constantly rubbing elbows with people doing legal work who make 10x their income, easily.
We'd like to think that there's a steady stream of incorruptible, genius judges with perfect ethics who will hold the job and never succumb to the temptations. But I don't think our society, and certainly not our legal system, is well-positioned to produce them. It's certainly not designed to groom those people to advance to the position of being appointed a Supreme Court Justice. It weeds those people out well beforehand.
Not really sure where I'm going with this, but fixing or changing salaries for the Supreme Court isn't really going to do much. The whole system needs retooling and I've little faith that we can do more than prop it up to provide least bad results -- keep patching and adding new firewall rules and hope it survives another cycle.
In an even remotely just world, though, Thomas would be impeached and imprisoned, or at the very least barred for life from holding any office or practicing law again.
posted by jzb at 6:55 AM on December 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
Because people are human and susceptible to envy, greed, and social pressure. And when you put a person in a position of huge influence and power, but surround them by people who have lavish lifestyles and immense wealth, you create a scenario where they're constantly having things they can't afford paraded in front of them and temptation to bend the rules for a taste of what they see as a better life.
Thomas is a creep. He was a creep before he became a Supreme Court Justice and I doubt that he was heavily influenced by all the money and trips and whatnot. That is to say – I'm not aware of any rulings that were out of character for him anyway, though perhaps he employed some extra mental gymnastics to get to the conclusion his patrons wanted on really awful rulings.
But, consider for a moment: Take someone who is presumed to be at the very very top of their game, a legal mind that is so exceptional they're given a position at the highest court in the land for life. Their rulings shape society. And yet, they're constantly rubbing elbows with people doing legal work who make 10x their income, easily.
We'd like to think that there's a steady stream of incorruptible, genius judges with perfect ethics who will hold the job and never succumb to the temptations. But I don't think our society, and certainly not our legal system, is well-positioned to produce them. It's certainly not designed to groom those people to advance to the position of being appointed a Supreme Court Justice. It weeds those people out well beforehand.
Not really sure where I'm going with this, but fixing or changing salaries for the Supreme Court isn't really going to do much. The whole system needs retooling and I've little faith that we can do more than prop it up to provide least bad results -- keep patching and adding new firewall rules and hope it survives another cycle.
In an even remotely just world, though, Thomas would be impeached and imprisoned, or at the very least barred for life from holding any office or practicing law again.
posted by jzb at 6:55 AM on December 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
IDK how DC compares to south SF bay, but $300k/yr here buys you a very average house and a very average car. And your neighbor will likely be paying 1/10th the property tax, having bought two decades prior.
Everything you wrote literally applies to Clarence Thomas - he was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1991, which is 3, not 2, decades prior.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:37 AM on December 19, 2023 [4 favorites]
Everything you wrote literally applies to Clarence Thomas - he was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1991, which is 3, not 2, decades prior.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:37 AM on December 19, 2023 [4 favorites]
I have a relative, an extremely blue collar guy who has spent his whole life doing the kind of hard work that does a number on your body. He just sold everything in order to buy a new RV. This will be his home for, he hopes, the rest of his days. He will keep handymanning for as long as possible and plans to trade labor for places to stay. And he hopes to travel and see beautiful things and be with his dogs. It cost $225k. I can't help but see this as precarious. And be kind of shocked at how much a new RV is! But I'm glad he got a brand new one and it's so big and he can probably fix most things himself. But that's his everything. He sold his house that was supposed to be the inheritance of his daughters and there will be nothing left at his end. And Thomas is here borrowing money to have a thing like that to just play with? A toy? (And it's probably some kind of money laundering scam anyway.) Thomas and his wife are garbage humans. The only thing that would turn me into a Biden evangelist is if he went after Thomas and impeached him. Sadly, Biden is merely a man. Loathe to to do anything but put a few words to how wrong he was over Anita Hill. Unwilling to take a strident approach to right a historical wrong. Unwilling to lose even a little clout. For the people that matter to him, this is a non-issue.
posted by amanda at 8:56 AM on December 19, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by amanda at 8:56 AM on December 19, 2023 [4 favorites]
Not really sure where I'm going with this, but fixing or changing salaries for the Supreme Court isn't really going to do much.
This is for sure. Because if we learned nothing, one thing we know is that even people who live on a literal mountain of gold will often exchange something of significance for a laughably small sum. We can't buy our way out of this pathetically human fallacy of loss aversion. The venal wealthy are also experts at giving you a bribe you don't even want - the appearance is enough to control you.
Thomas was plucked from his poor Georgia* family as a Boy of Promise and away from his sister and mother who were left to toil and scrape in abject poverty. He blamed his sister for her lot in life. He scorned her for the way she was trapped by circumstance. He is NO JUDGE OF CHARACTER. He is toxic Americana.
*ETA: I just checked and he was born in Georgia not Mississippi.
https://newrepublic.com/post/172494/clarence-thomas-smeared-sister-gain-right-wing-cool-points
posted by amanda at 9:03 AM on December 19, 2023 [9 favorites]
This is for sure. Because if we learned nothing, one thing we know is that even people who live on a literal mountain of gold will often exchange something of significance for a laughably small sum. We can't buy our way out of this pathetically human fallacy of loss aversion. The venal wealthy are also experts at giving you a bribe you don't even want - the appearance is enough to control you.
Thomas was plucked from his poor Georgia* family as a Boy of Promise and away from his sister and mother who were left to toil and scrape in abject poverty. He blamed his sister for her lot in life. He scorned her for the way she was trapped by circumstance. He is NO JUDGE OF CHARACTER. He is toxic Americana.
*ETA: I just checked and he was born in Georgia not Mississippi.
https://newrepublic.com/post/172494/clarence-thomas-smeared-sister-gain-right-wing-cool-points
posted by amanda at 9:03 AM on December 19, 2023 [9 favorites]
As mentioned above there are perks to Thomas’ current job that come after one retires. So a possible solution for him is to retire and then he can get paid to speak for as much as he wants. Oh right, nobody will care what he says when he can’t potentially help The Cause. Wager the vacations dry up too.
posted by terrapin at 9:17 AM on December 19, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by terrapin at 9:17 AM on December 19, 2023 [1 favorite]
The fact that they can go make triple (or more? I don't know) at any private law firm they want doesn't go away.
If they’re so tempted by the money, why don’t they switch over to one of these higher paying jobs folks keep bringing up? Like Thomas was going to do before being bribed to stay, apparently.
I note that in a choice between making even more money honestly (within current systems) versus making more but not that much more money dishonestly, Thomas chose the less-more, dishonest route. Clearly the money wasn’t his only consideration.
I work in academia, in the sciences end of things, where quite a few of us could be much richer had we gone into industry (and the salary crossover point is immediate, not only after folks reach some level of seniority). Corruption happens, but the vast majority of academics in such circumstances don’t take bribes. ‘Course, most universities have rules against doing so, and while we don’t have the same sort of reporting requirements or active oversight (so someone could conceivably be clever enough to effectively hide such financial corruption), there would be actual consequences for anyone who got caught. On the other hand, the most obvious case of corruption or nepotism I’ve seen in academia was a university president who managed to get hired at a very tidy salary, higher than their predecessor in the position and higher than their previous salary, and about equivalent to the university football coach, while escaping a brewing nepotism/affair scandal at their previous job, who brought along the person they were rumoured to be having an affair with as part of their senior management team. I also have lived in places where there has been some nepotism or similar questionably-corrupt activity in awarding contracts and such from local and regional governments, including where local politicians made more in public service than they would in the private sector (rural economies being less rich overall in some cases).
In all cases I’ve observed, the problem is not how much people are getting paid; the problem is lack of guidelines and oversight to prevent bribes and corruption. And people failing up into positions of greater power due to flawed hiring criteria and processes. Arguably, covering student loans or similar debts (or, eg., providing nice housing as part of the job benefits) but otherwise paying people less seems to lessen the appeal of positions where corruption could cause greater harm to those who would be more inclined toward accepting bribes, based on the situations I’ve seen.
Also, seeing the discrepancy between public and private $250K+ salaries and ignoring the extremes of wealth inequality that have developed in the past half-century, including the explosion of the ratio of highest:lowest salaries in many private companies, to argue that public salaries are low rather than that private salaries are unjustifiably high seems a bit delusional to me. I understand that fixing this inequality is a lot more involved, and some of you are concerned about more short-term fixes so that the US system of at least kinda sorta democratic governance survives long enough to enable the larger issues to be addressed. But at least suggest short-term fixes that won’t structurally exacerbate the fundamental economic problem of power balance leading to bribes being effective in the first place, or the existence of such large pay disparities that you have (mis-)identified as the problem here.
posted by eviemath at 9:52 AM on December 19, 2023 [7 favorites]
If they’re so tempted by the money, why don’t they switch over to one of these higher paying jobs folks keep bringing up? Like Thomas was going to do before being bribed to stay, apparently.
I note that in a choice between making even more money honestly (within current systems) versus making more but not that much more money dishonestly, Thomas chose the less-more, dishonest route. Clearly the money wasn’t his only consideration.
I work in academia, in the sciences end of things, where quite a few of us could be much richer had we gone into industry (and the salary crossover point is immediate, not only after folks reach some level of seniority). Corruption happens, but the vast majority of academics in such circumstances don’t take bribes. ‘Course, most universities have rules against doing so, and while we don’t have the same sort of reporting requirements or active oversight (so someone could conceivably be clever enough to effectively hide such financial corruption), there would be actual consequences for anyone who got caught. On the other hand, the most obvious case of corruption or nepotism I’ve seen in academia was a university president who managed to get hired at a very tidy salary, higher than their predecessor in the position and higher than their previous salary, and about equivalent to the university football coach, while escaping a brewing nepotism/affair scandal at their previous job, who brought along the person they were rumoured to be having an affair with as part of their senior management team. I also have lived in places where there has been some nepotism or similar questionably-corrupt activity in awarding contracts and such from local and regional governments, including where local politicians made more in public service than they would in the private sector (rural economies being less rich overall in some cases).
In all cases I’ve observed, the problem is not how much people are getting paid; the problem is lack of guidelines and oversight to prevent bribes and corruption. And people failing up into positions of greater power due to flawed hiring criteria and processes. Arguably, covering student loans or similar debts (or, eg., providing nice housing as part of the job benefits) but otherwise paying people less seems to lessen the appeal of positions where corruption could cause greater harm to those who would be more inclined toward accepting bribes, based on the situations I’ve seen.
Also, seeing the discrepancy between public and private $250K+ salaries and ignoring the extremes of wealth inequality that have developed in the past half-century, including the explosion of the ratio of highest:lowest salaries in many private companies, to argue that public salaries are low rather than that private salaries are unjustifiably high seems a bit delusional to me. I understand that fixing this inequality is a lot more involved, and some of you are concerned about more short-term fixes so that the US system of at least kinda sorta democratic governance survives long enough to enable the larger issues to be addressed. But at least suggest short-term fixes that won’t structurally exacerbate the fundamental economic problem of power balance leading to bribes being effective in the first place, or the existence of such large pay disparities that you have (mis-)identified as the problem here.
posted by eviemath at 9:52 AM on December 19, 2023 [7 favorites]
I mean, yes, hearing my entire career that universities (or public school systems, or any private sector employer, even) have to pay huge amounts in order to attract the best talent for the one to five top senior manager positions, yet somehow that same reasoning never applies to those of us in any lower positions has colored my opinion about that particular neoliberal, trickle-down economics canard, but it also seems like highly relevant data or experience. Maybe we can trust our own eyes that trickle down economic structures don’t work, or the plentiful data to that effect, rather than relying on a tidy but substantiated theory.
posted by eviemath at 10:00 AM on December 19, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by eviemath at 10:00 AM on December 19, 2023 [8 favorites]
For years, there were stories to the effect that Thomas had never asked a single question from the bench until a brief interval after Scalia died! And when he did finally ask that first question, Roberts did a double take and turned in his chair to peer down at Thomas in obvious shock.
Thomas has had anything but a standard career as a Justice, for all that, in my opinion, he looks more distinguished and imposing in group photos than any other Justice.
posted by jamjam at 11:34 AM on December 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
Thomas has had anything but a standard career as a Justice, for all that, in my opinion, he looks more distinguished and imposing in group photos than any other Justice.
posted by jamjam at 11:34 AM on December 19, 2023 [3 favorites]
he looks more distinguished and imposing in group photos than any other Justice
It's amazing how resentment and spite can show up on film.
posted by hippybear at 1:07 PM on December 19, 2023 [1 favorite]
It's amazing how resentment and spite can show up on film.
posted by hippybear at 1:07 PM on December 19, 2023 [1 favorite]
there were stories to the effect that Thomas had never asked a single question from the bench
There are so, so many terrible things about that man but everything I have ever read suggests very firmly that he simply thought that oral argument was stupid.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 1:14 PM on December 19, 2023
There are so, so many terrible things about that man but everything I have ever read suggests very firmly that he simply thought that oral argument was stupid.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 1:14 PM on December 19, 2023
And somehow Scalia's death made oral argument seem more relevant?
posted by jamjam at 1:24 PM on December 19, 2023
posted by jamjam at 1:24 PM on December 19, 2023
Everything you wrote literally applies to Clarence Thomas - he was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1991, which is 3, not 2, decades prior.
Property tax in Georgia (where the Thomas' mansion is) can float freely depending on assessed property value. Property taxes in the Bay Area are limited by CA Prop 13, which limits increases to 2%/year, regardless of assessed value. So if you buy property in California, your taxes are almost guaranteed to increase at a rate far, far less than your assessed property value increases.
posted by mr_roboto at 5:49 PM on December 19, 2023
Property tax in Georgia (where the Thomas' mansion is) can float freely depending on assessed property value. Property taxes in the Bay Area are limited by CA Prop 13, which limits increases to 2%/year, regardless of assessed value. So if you buy property in California, your taxes are almost guaranteed to increase at a rate far, far less than your assessed property value increases.
posted by mr_roboto at 5:49 PM on December 19, 2023
We'd like to think that there's a steady stream of incorruptible, genius judges with perfect ethics who will hold the job and never succumb to the temptations. But I don't think our society, and certainly not our legal system, is well-positioned to produce them. It's certainly not designed to groom those people to advance to the position of being appointed a Supreme Court Justice. It weeds those people out well beforehand.
Except that the formal requirements to be nominated to the Supreme Court are very broad - there are a lot of people out there who qualify. And while plenty of people going into law for money/power, I have one acquaintance who specializes in labor law - before that, he was a union organizer. He could make more than he does, but for him getting a JD was a way to make more than an organizer but still be making a positive contribution to society. The fanciest member of my family is a law professor, and while he has done well for himself, he is happy to live on his professor salary, spending his free time doing pro bono work for the Innocence Project (and coordinating his students to join him), and advocating for (and winning) social justice legal reforms in his city/state.
So yeah, I'm not convinced that there are not people with adequate legal expertise and experience who also have a track record of using that expertise to improve society. It might require reconsidering some of the cultural norms around Supreme Court nominations - like the current preference for an Ivy League grad.
posted by coffeecat at 8:08 AM on December 20, 2023 [6 favorites]
Except that the formal requirements to be nominated to the Supreme Court are very broad - there are a lot of people out there who qualify. And while plenty of people going into law for money/power, I have one acquaintance who specializes in labor law - before that, he was a union organizer. He could make more than he does, but for him getting a JD was a way to make more than an organizer but still be making a positive contribution to society. The fanciest member of my family is a law professor, and while he has done well for himself, he is happy to live on his professor salary, spending his free time doing pro bono work for the Innocence Project (and coordinating his students to join him), and advocating for (and winning) social justice legal reforms in his city/state.
So yeah, I'm not convinced that there are not people with adequate legal expertise and experience who also have a track record of using that expertise to improve society. It might require reconsidering some of the cultural norms around Supreme Court nominations - like the current preference for an Ivy League grad.
posted by coffeecat at 8:08 AM on December 20, 2023 [6 favorites]
As I understand it, even being or having been a lawyer is NOT a necessary qualification for serving as a Justice, but all of them to date have been lawyers.
posted by jamjam at 10:21 AM on December 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by jamjam at 10:21 AM on December 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
It appears that Rupert Murdoch may have also contributed to the Thomas gravy train, by overpaying for his autobiography.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 2:52 PM on December 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
The book was published in 2007. A paperback edition is still in print, and an ebook and audiobook became available in 2021, yet the Daily Beast has noted that Thomas failed to declare any royalties from the book for at least fourteen years.Thomas got $1.5 million upfront from Murdoch-owned Harper Collins.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 2:52 PM on December 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
I'm curious, because the rot doesn't usually just stop at a clear demarcation, how much Thomas is hiding from not just financial disclosures as part of his role in the judiciary, but the IRS.
posted by jason_steakums at 4:03 PM on December 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by jason_steakums at 4:03 PM on December 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
It might require reconsidering some of the cultural norms around Supreme Court nominations - like the current preference for an Ivy League grad.
Or the current preference for graduates of the same private high school
posted by hydropsyche at 5:15 AM on December 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Or the current preference for graduates of the same private high school
posted by hydropsyche at 5:15 AM on December 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
« Older "A blessing offers people a means to increase... | Ladies And Gentlemen, this is Manhattan Transfer Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by grumpybear69 at 12:47 PM on December 18, 2023 [90 favorites]