Good, let's hope the move has the intended effect. Amarillo federal Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk is a dangerous RW asshole who lacks the integrity to recuse himself from obvious judge shopped cases.
It's a start I guess....
anyone who believes that federal and state policies should not rise and fall based on one outlier judge’s partisan views.
Why is someone with partisan views a judge in the first place?
Eamus Catuli~AC 000000000101010202020303010304 020405....Ahhhh, forget it, it's gonna be a while.
anyone who believes that federal and state policies should not rise and fall based on one outlier judge’s partisan views.
Why is someone with partisan views a judge in the first place?
The options are:
Appointment by partisan pols;
Election on partisan tickets like NC (except the SC now);
Non-partisan elections where partisan endorsements are made and everyone knows which way the judges lean (like the NC SC now).
Maybe non-partisan judicial commissions with strict ethical codes would work
O Really, in school or professionally have you had any discussions about judicial selection options and the pluses and minuses of different systems?
A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower.
-- Charlie Sykes on MSNBC
1312. ETTD.
O Really, in school or professionally have you had any discussions about judicial selection options and the pluses and minuses of different systems?
Not much, but as might be expected I have an opinion. I think election is a bad system, but probably the best choice. If all judges were appointed, the corruption would be overwhelming. Some can be appointed, with reasonable levels of review/confirmation, but for most election is pretty much the only choice. But judge election should be non-partisan, even if people know that Judge Crank is lifelong Democrat. A judge is supposed to follow the law whether s/he agrees with it or not, and although interpretations may vary, decisions shouldn't be partisan. And a judge may be a member of a party, but s/he shouldn't be beholden to a party or its machinery. Yeah, I know, there will always be partisan hacks in office, and there will always be corruption in the system. But it shouldn't be stamped on the face of it like partisan elections are.
Not much, but as might be expected I have an opinion. I think election is a bad system, but probably the best choice. If all judges were appointed, the corruption would be overwhelming. Some can be appointed, with reasonable levels of review/confirmation, but for most election is pretty much the only choice. But judge election should be non-partisan, even if people know that Judge Crank is lifelong Democrat. A judge is supposed to follow the law whether s/he agrees with it or not, and although interpretations may vary, decisions shouldn't be partisan. And a judge may be a member of a party, but s/he shouldn't be beholden to a party or its machinery. Yeah, I know, there will always be partisan hacks in office, and there will always be corruption in the system. But it shouldn't be stamped on the face of it like partisan elections are.
Makes sense, though I think we still desperately need real campaign finance reform if we're going to place trust in voters.
Since 2020, a foundation has honored prominent women with the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Leadership Award, named after the late Supreme Court justice who championed women’s rights and liberal causes. But this year’s lineup stands out: Four of the recipients are men. Two of them have done prison time for financial crimes. One founded Fox News. Another is Elon Musk.
Musk,
Martha Stewart, Ok, but it's not like she needs recognition.
Michael Milken,
Rupert Murdoch
and Sylvester Stallone Silly.
are the “five iconic individuals” who will receive the Ginsburg Leadership Award next month at the Library of Congress in an exclusive ceremony and gala, according to a news release from the award’s organizer, the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation....
All are filthy rich. This smells like a fundraising ploy by the foundation
A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower.
-- Charlie Sykes on MSNBC
1312. ETTD.
... Some residents have also bridled at the noise and intrusion brought by protesters, who started showing up outside the Alito residence in 2022 after the Supreme Court overturned the federal right to abortion. Other neighbors have joined the demonstrators, whose intent was “to bring the protest to their personal lives because the decisions affect our personal lives,” said Heather-Ann Irons, who came to the street to protest.
The half-dozen neighbors who saw the flag, or knew of it, requested anonymity because they said they did not want to add to the contentiousness on the block and feared reprisal. Last Saturday, May 11, protesters returned to the street, waving flags of their own (“Don’t Tread on My Uterus”) and using a megaphone to broadcast expletives at Alito, who was in Ohio giving a commencement address. Martha-Ann Alito appeared in a window, complaining to the Supreme Court security detail outside....
Interesting timing. Maybe some pro-choice neighbor is tired of the disruption that the Alitos' presence causes?
A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower.
-- Charlie Sykes on MSNBC
1312. ETTD.
Justice Samuel Alito is rejecting calls to step aside from Supreme Court cases involving former President Donald Trump and Jan. 6 defendants, saying his wife hoisted the two controversial flags that flew above their homes.
“My wife is fond of flying flags. I am not,” Alito wrote Wednesday.
In letters to members of Congress, Alito said his wife, Martha-Ann, was responsible for flying both an upside-down flag over their home in 2021 and an “Appeal to Heaven” flag at their New Jersey beach house last year. Both flags were like those carried by rioters who violently stormed the Capitol in January 2021 while echoing Trump’s false claims of election fraud.
Henceforth to be known as the 'Whipped Alito Defense'.
... Alito said he was unaware that the upside-down flag was flying above his house until it was called to his attention. “As soon as I saw it, I asked my wife to take it down, but for several days, she refused,” he wrote in nearly identical letters to Democrats in the House and the Senate.
What, he doesn't know how to operate a flagpole?
... The flag at his beach house was also hoisted by his wife, Alito wrote, noting that the house is in her name and was bought with money she inherited from her parents.
Alito said he was unfamiliar with the “Appeal to Heaven” flag when it was flown, but he noted it dates back to the American Revolution. “I was not aware of any connection between this historic flag and the 'Stop the Steal Movement' and neither was my wife,” Alito wrote.
He said Martha-Ann Alito did not fly that flag to associate herself with the rioters or the effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election, which Trump, a Republican, lost to Joe Biden, a Democrat....
Just a coincidence, right? Right?
What will be the next depth of The Supremes sleaze that will be revealed? It seems endless.
Last edited by Vrede too on Wed May 29, 2024 11:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower.
-- Charlie Sykes on MSNBC
1312. ETTD.
According to an exclusive report from Rolling Stone, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s husband, Jesse Barrett, is now repping Fox Corporation in a $3 million defamation suit, raising questions about conflicts of interest and personal enrichment enjoyed by conservative Supreme Court justices.
... Jesse Barrett’s list of anonymized cases on the SouthBank Legal website now includes “represented a prominent media company in a lawsuit alleging defamation.” That addition joins an already lengthy list of white-collar cases on his company profile, tucked between defending a Berkshire Hathaway company in an employment discrimination suit and defending an event promoter from fraud claims....
Regardless, it’s entirely too convenient that the husband of a conservative Supreme Court justice is representing a conservative media company, and poses curious questions as to why Barrett, who is based in D.C., was tapped to represent the media company based in New York City for a lawsuit filed by a man in Illinois.
Last edited by Vrede too on Wed May 29, 2024 11:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower.
-- Charlie Sykes on MSNBC
1312. ETTD.
It would have been nice to see a more aggressive DoJ.
That didn't take long: