The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

[SpaceCoastVol]

View attachment 659426

And ethics code.... wow, I can't imagine what could possibly go wrong there.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I wouldn't even think that is possible without a Convention.

He is worried about the conduct of the Supreme Court when he can't even keep his son away from the cocaine in the White House?

 

[Vol423]

Democrats trying to make a mountain out of a demonstrably corrupt Supreme Court Justice. As in seriously corrupt.

We've just now learned that Thomas and Harlan Crow--who I read has Nazi sympathies--took a trip to Russia in 2003. Did Thomas report this
trip to the government, as he was supposed to? He did not. He kept it secret. The man should be impeached. We've got a lumpy black trump on SCOTUS. This thread lays out some of the implications....

Oh look! A tribute to Turbo. He was on his final countdown.

 

[Vol423]

Nobody knows a lack of ethics like a Biden.

 

[CagleMtnVol]

Term limits? Says the man who has been in politics for over 50 years. 36 of them as US Senator.

 

[Vol423]

Term limits? Says the man who has been in politics for over 50 years. 36 of them as US Senator.

Well, it would be terrible for an old person riddled with dementia to hold onto public office long after their mental expiration date.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Oh look! A tribute to Turbo. He was on his final countdown.

 

[lawgator1]

I agree they need a set of specific ethics rules. As is, it's not transparent and that's long term bad for the Court.

As to term limits, I'm on the fence. I might prefer age limits. Maybe 70 or 75.

 

[Vol423]

I agree they need a set of specific ethics rules. As is, it's not transparent and that's long term bad for the Court.

As to term limits, I'm on the fence. I might prefer age limits. Maybe 70 or 75.

As a member of the bar, I strongly suspect they are already subject to ethics rules. You claim to be an attorney. Do you disagree?

 

[volfanhill]

As a member of the bar, I strongly suspect they are already subject to ethics rules. You claim to be an attorney. Do you disagree?

You don't have to be a member of the bar to be a SCOTUS. Heck you don't even have to have a law degree

 

[Orangeburst]

You don't have to be a member of the bar to be a SCOTUS. Heck you don't even have to have a law degree

So we could theoretically have 9 LGs on the SCOTUS?

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

As a member of the bar, I strongly suspect they are already subject to ethics rules. You claim to be an attorney. Do you disagree?

Seems the ethical codes are more laxed. They've made 2 different decisions affecting their own ethics, reducing the scrutiny of their actions and decisions. That's BS. No way that branch of government should be beyond reproach.

 

[Orangeburst]

There is accountabilty. Impeachment.

 

[McDad]

You don't have to be a member of the bar to be a SCOTUS. Heck you don't even have to have a law degree

Really?

Wonder why Constitutional scholars from academia arent nominated?

 

[lawgator1]

As a member of the bar, I strongly suspect they are already subject to ethics rules. You claim to be an attorney. Do you disagree?

No, being a member of the Bar would not translate to ethics rules for judges, such as disclosure of gifts or services over a certain amount. As an attorney I don't have any such obligation. As a judge, in state court for example, I would. The US Supreme Court is on an island on this point.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Seems the ethical codes are more laxed. They've made 2 different decisions affecting their own ethics, reducing the scrutiny of their actions and decisions. That's BS. No way that branch of government should be beyond reproach.

But there is process.

 

[StarRaider]

You don't have to be a member of the bar to be a SCOTUS. Heck you don't even have to have a law degree

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

But there is process.

Yes, but there is no chance that will play out. Too many staunch tribalists

 

[LSU-SIU]

Yes, but there is no chance that will play out. Too many staunch tribalists

That is the whole purpose, its an extreme tool.... but your statement is false, and for good reason.

 

[Orangeburst]

View attachment 659468

you would be out before we got the check.

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

That is the whole purpose, its an extreme tool.... but your statement is false, and for good reason.

So you say. Give me some detailed evidence why my statement is false

 

[Vol423]

You don't have to be a member of the bar to be a SCOTUS. Heck you don't even have to have a law degree

…but they ARE all members of the bar, which means they are subject to ethics rules already.

 

[LSU-SIU]

So you say. Give me some detailed evidence why my statement is false

Its either false, maybe more correctly - a strawman.

No way that branch of government should be beyond reproach.

 

[LSU-SIU]

…but they ARE all members of the bar, which means they are subject to ethics rules already.

But having the bar disbar the judge in particular does nothing to the appointment. There is already process for that though... there simply isn't a problem to fix.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around what he is even proposing which wouldn't require a Constitutional Convention.

 

[ETV]

Really?

Wonder why Constitutional scholars from academia arent nominated?

Because they're too busy offering legal counsel to current and past administrations.