The need for ethics on the Supreme Court, especially when a spouse is seeking to abet the overthrow of a democratically elected government, could not be more obvious. So is the need for investigation.
Totally agree. Why is it that there are no rules for Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from any one all of these cases that come to the Supreme Court? Why does the Supreme Court leave such decisions solely up to each Justice, keeping in mind that these 9 Justices are appointed for life. Do we need to rethink "for life"? Do we need to rethink giving these 9 Justices so much power and so much discretion. Ethics considerations are in place in other branches in government. Why's ethics not a factor on the Supreme Court. Maybe this court is too Supreme.
There's zero chance if we were to design a Supreme Court from the ground up we would omit ethical curbs or term limits. No one would think this would be a good idea. Doing so would be naive, reckless, and anyone arguing for it would be laughed out of the office.
I believe we can all agree.
So, why do we insist these matters can't be changed?
This is stuff of third-world kangaroo courts. And, the USA.
Virginia Thomas came from a Republican, conservative family and was appointed to various government jobs by Reagan and trump. Once belonging to a cult supposedly aimed at reaching, one's potential, she "deprogrammed" and became active in anti cultism, a cult being an organization led by an egotistical pathological liar who believes the world owes him. But here she is now, an over active member in trump's menagerie, in a word, a cult. Thomas knew who she was when he married her before he became a justice. He shared her conservative outlook. Scalia was his role model. It was 10 years on the bench before Thomas even asked a question, a case about whether an abuser should be able to have a gun. Thomas believed to deny was against a constitutional right. In other words, the general Republican view of guns.
It is commonly believed he lied about sexually harassing Anita Hill, but he was given a pass. That is what he is being given now. He and his wife are of the same mind, for all we know, he may have encouraged her. We know he lies.
As chief justice, Roberts can choose who will write the majority opinion. If he dissents, the most senior justice does this. That would be Thomas, longest serving on the court.. While we call for him to either resign or at the least, recuse himself from cases concerning Jan 6 because of his wife's activity, the cows will come home before this man will give up the prestigious title or the power he holds. Criticism then becomes, as usual, the fact that he is a black man, a racist judgment.
While I think government elites should have term limits, the constitutional amendment requirements are extremely stringent; those in power are first of all, politicians, and they will never , like Thomas, pack it up. And as we have seen so often, investigations go nowhere. "Stuff" continues.
Totally agree. Why is it that there are no rules for Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from any one all of these cases that come to the Supreme Court? Why does the Supreme Court leave such decisions solely up to each Justice, keeping in mind that these 9 Justices are appointed for life. Do we need to rethink "for life"? Do we need to rethink giving these 9 Justices so much power and so much discretion. Ethics considerations are in place in other branches in government. Why's ethics not a factor on the Supreme Court. Maybe this court is too Supreme.
There's zero chance if we were to design a Supreme Court from the ground up we would omit ethical curbs or term limits. No one would think this would be a good idea. Doing so would be naive, reckless, and anyone arguing for it would be laughed out of the office.
I believe we can all agree.
So, why do we insist these matters can't be changed?
This is stuff of third-world kangaroo courts. And, the USA.
Virginia Thomas came from a Republican, conservative family and was appointed to various government jobs by Reagan and trump. Once belonging to a cult supposedly aimed at reaching, one's potential, she "deprogrammed" and became active in anti cultism, a cult being an organization led by an egotistical pathological liar who believes the world owes him. But here she is now, an over active member in trump's menagerie, in a word, a cult. Thomas knew who she was when he married her before he became a justice. He shared her conservative outlook. Scalia was his role model. It was 10 years on the bench before Thomas even asked a question, a case about whether an abuser should be able to have a gun. Thomas believed to deny was against a constitutional right. In other words, the general Republican view of guns.
It is commonly believed he lied about sexually harassing Anita Hill, but he was given a pass. That is what he is being given now. He and his wife are of the same mind, for all we know, he may have encouraged her. We know he lies.
As chief justice, Roberts can choose who will write the majority opinion. If he dissents, the most senior justice does this. That would be Thomas, longest serving on the court.. While we call for him to either resign or at the least, recuse himself from cases concerning Jan 6 because of his wife's activity, the cows will come home before this man will give up the prestigious title or the power he holds. Criticism then becomes, as usual, the fact that he is a black man, a racist judgment.
While I think government elites should have term limits, the constitutional amendment requirements are extremely stringent; those in power are first of all, politicians, and they will never , like Thomas, pack it up. And as we have seen so often, investigations go nowhere. "Stuff" continues.
Clarence Thomas has become a blight on the Court.
SCROTUS DGAF. Any Democrat not loudly advocating for expansion is not serious about solving the problem. Fun fact, Biden voted to put Thomas on.
https://www.instagram.com/p/Ce4jKlIMz3U/?igshid=NDBlY2NjN2I=