362

Harlan Crow Provided Clarence Thomas at Least 3 Previously Undisclosed Private Jet Trips, Senate Probe Finds (www.propublica.org)

submitted 4 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 23 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 48 points 4 months ago

Okay obviously SCOTUS is the problem here, but Dick Fucking Durbin should've subpoena every single one of those fucks to testify before Congress. I don't care if they refuse, send the Sergeant At Arms and drag them in. And I'm not talking about just the conservatives. I want to know why the fuck Kagan, Sotomayor, and KBJ don't think they need an enforceable ethics code, because they've signed on to that too.

Letting these unelected zealots operate with minimal pushback is completely unacceptable.

[-] n2burns@lemmy.ca 19 points 4 months ago

I agree with your message, but as a Canadian, I always find it funny how Americans throw around "unelected" as a pejorative. Very few countries hold elections for anything that isn't a professional-political positions. Maybe I'm biased from my experiences, but I don't think there is anything wrong with judges being unelected, they should be apolitical and follow a code of ethics.

[-] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

The craziest thing to me as a non-American is that Sheriffs are voted for.

Zero qualifications, just need to be popular.

What. The. Fuck.

[-] the_artic_one@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago

Why is it a bad thing that the head of law enforcement be accountable to the people directly? Why is it better for them to be appointed by a wealthy politician?

[-] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Law enforcement should always require training and knowledge of the law.

Politicians are there to oversee and be elected, they are accountable to the people directly and they have the power to fire police officers.

Law enforcement shouldn’t be elected and thus be influenced by people directly

[-] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

They are public servants.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

I'm American and I agree with you 100%. You actually can elect local judges in many places in the U.S. and it's a terrible idea because people have no idea what they're voting for most of the time, and how can they? It's not like there's a lot of easily available literature about the people running to convict criminals. I usually end up voting for anyone who is a woman or a POC if I can just to increase diversity in the courts system, but as with Amy Coney Barrett and Clarence Thomas, that is obviously no guarantee.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 4 months ago

It's also a pejorative that people only use when the ruling is against their interests.

My state (Wisconsin) elects its Supreme Court justices. It's a mixed bag. We had several years of conservative rule on the court with some terrible consequences. Now we have a liberal majority pretty well entrenched and things are starting to work out better.

What I do know is that federal Supreme Court justices shouldn't have lifetime terms. It should be long, but not lifetime.

[-] n2burns@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

I'm not even sure if terms are necessary, though I don't mind the idea of a long term where at the end, Justices would have to be re-nominated. The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) does just fine with lifetime appointments (though we do have mandatory retirement at 75).

I think we could tinker with rules and procedure (for example, instituting strong codes of ethics), but I think what SCOTUS needs is a change in cultural norms, and that's extremely hard to bring about. The process for appointments to the SCC and SCOTUS are very similar, yet SCOTUS appointments are highly politicized while any "seemingly political" appointments of judges in Canada have faced huge public backlashes.

I think there are many differences that created these cultural norms but IMHO, one of the biggest is the politicization of lower-level judges (as well as other positions). This interweaves law and politics, and it's not unheard of for members of the judiciary to jump into full political-positions and back again. This is very different than Canada, where we also have many lawyers who enter politics, but that basically closes the door on ever entering the judiciary.

[-] bradorsomething@ttrpg.network 16 points 4 months ago

Dammit Clarance, we fought a whole ass war about whether a white man was allowed to own you!

[-] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.autism.place 12 points 4 months ago

Why is everyone concerned that Harlan is such a good and giving friend?? I give my friends vacations all the time without any quid pro quo. /s

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

i can't wait for this new revelation to have dire consequences

[-] Treczoks@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

That would be nice...

[-] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 9 points 4 months ago

Clarence “The Puppet” Thomas

Supreme Court Mercenary

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

The funny part to me is that I'm pretty sure Thomas would have always voted the way Harlan Crow wanted him to without all these gifts because they are ideologically aligned. So this is a complete waste of time in terms of trying to engage in corrupting a judge.

[-] Magnergy@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

I get what your point, and is a fair one. Except there is evidence that he wouldn't have been voting their way, since he was thinking of leaving the court, or at least gave that impression to others to get a raise. Then the gift tap turned on...

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

[-] Cosmicomical@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

I don't think he ever disclosed anything we didn't already know. That's not how disclosure works.

[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 5 points 4 months ago

At least Harlan Crow doesn't have any cases in front of the Supreme Court! Otherwise this might look REALLY bad! Anyways we need to look into JUDGE MERCHAN'S DAUGHTER! That's a Conflict Of Interest!

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

He had cases before the court in the past, or at least cases which served his interests. He's been doing this with Thomas since before those cases.

[-] DancingBear@midwest.social -3 points 4 months ago

They’re just attacking poor justice Thomas for political reasons

[-] DancingBear@midwest.social -3 points 4 months ago

They’re just attacking poor justice Thomas for political reasons

this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024

362 points (99.7% liked)

News

23161 readers

2820 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

rjc@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

Blackbeard@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world