Why the Supreme Court Is Blind to Its Own Corruption

[onthedarkside]

 

The scandal surrounding Justice Clarence Thomas has further eroded the already record-low public confidence in the Supreme Court. If Chief Justice John Roberts wonders how such a thing could have happened, he might start looking for answers within the cloistered walls of his own courtroom.

Over more than two decades, the Supreme Court has gutted laws aimed at fighting corruption and at limiting the ability of the powerful to enrich public officials in a position to advance their interests. 

 

As a result, today wealthy individuals and corporations may buy political access and influence with little fear of legal consequences, either for them or for the beneficiaries of their largess.

 

READ MORE

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/18/opinion/supreme-court-clarence-thomas-corruption.html

 

 

No Paywall Archive Link

[OneMoreFarang]

No surprise. The USA is the best democracy money can buy.

That's a well-known fact. 

[KhunLA]

That fact has never been hidden, quite the contrary ...

[RichardColeman]

More corrupt than the current DOJ and FBI ? That would be debatable 

[PETERTHEEATER]

Thank goodness this could never happen in LOS.

[onthedarkside]

Post with unsubstantiated off topic claims has been removed. 

 

Topic is: Why the Supreme Court Is Blind to Its Own Corruption

 

Not the Biden family

 

[bendejo]

Why the Supreme Court Is Blind to Its Own Corruption

Maybe it's something like the way Dracula cannot see himself in a mirror.

 

My take is they've normalized it to the degree that they have become sloppy, and now that it is becoming visible to the rest of the country they've taken an up yours stance.  Look at the hearings of the T____/Federalist Society appointees, particularly Gorsuch's smirk said it all: "I'm lying, you know I'm lying, and what are YOU gonna do about it?"

The highest court in the land is corrupt, with no mechanism to take them to task.  Part of the overall sedition plot.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely, cliched but true.

 

 

[herfiehandbag]

As ever, may I start by declaring that I am an outside observer.

 

I have two "takes". The first is that as that as the members of the court are effectively political appointees, their likely and proven political reliability, in the view of unscrupulous and partisan politicians, far outweigh any reservations on matters of either legal experience and wisdom, (looking at some recent appointments) or financial integrity. To paraphrase: "they may be corrupt/inadequate bastards, but they are our corrupt/inadequate bastards"!

 

Secondly, tenure. Life tenure was not a major problem when life expectancy was limited to the mid sixties and early seventies. Appointments were made late in life, and nature would sort out any problems. People live far longer, and appointments are made younger, so terms of 20 to 30 years are possible. A corrupt (or indeed inadequate or politically driven) judge, actual or suspected, may have 20 more years to live, and sit, and no mechanism to review him or her. 

Edited May 20, 2023 by herfiehandbag

[placnx]

On 5/19/2023 at 9:24 PM, herfiehandbag said:

As ever, may I start by declaring that I am an outside observer.

 

I have two "takes". The first is that as that as the members of the court are effectively political appointees, their likely and proven political reliability, in the view of unscrupulous and partisan politicians, far outweigh any reservations on matters of either legal experience and wisdom, (looking at some recent appointments) or financial integrity. To paraphrase: "they may be corrupt/inadequate bastards, but they are our corrupt/inadequate bastards"!

 

Secondly, tenure. Life tenure was not a major problem when life expectancy was limited to the mid sixties and early seventies. Appointments were made late in life, and nature would sort out any problems. People live far longer, and appointments are made younger, so terms of 20 to 30 years are possible. A corrupt (or indeed inadequate or politically driven) judge, actual or suspected, may have 20 more years to live, and sit, and no mechanism to review him or her. 

It's become an echo chamber for opportunistic reactionaries.

[herfiehandbag]

2 hours ago, placnx said:

It's become an echo chamber for opportunistic reactionaries.

Unfortunately, like most echo chambers, it has real power. Power which is supposed to reflect the word and spirit of the law, but now perhaps is used to reflect the political leanings of the political appointees who make up the court. Perhaps that is the real corruption?

[bamnutsak]

Clarence being Clarence...that's a nice Supreme Court ya got there, be a shame if something happened to it.

 

 

 

A “Delicate Matter”: Clarence Thomas’ Private Complaints About Money Sparked Fears He Would Resign

 

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

 

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.

At the resort, Thomas gave a speech at an off-the-record conservative conference. He found himself seated next to a Republican member of Congress on the flight home. The two men talked, and the lawmaker left the conversation worried that Thomas might resign.

 

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-money-complaints-sparked-resignation-fears-scotus

[ozimoron]

 

[thaibeachlovers]

Shouldn't there be a time limit on threads? I came on here expecting something new, but it's a zombie thread.

[Dcheech]

Thanks for the follow up information on the ongoing corruption of the US Supreme Court by conservative money. Living over here it is easy to forget just how ugly & sordid it has all become.

 

Labeling this 'zombie news' & appealing to delete it?!  Cancel Culture rears its ugly head yet again.

 

 

 

 

[ozimoron]

18 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Shouldn't there be a time limit on threads? I came on here expecting something new, but it's a zombie thread.

 

You already knew about that letter? wow!

[Tug]

I’d call it willful blindness or perhaps hoping we won’t notice