Republicans have a good track record for rewarding those who help tear down institutions and norms in pursuit of Republicans retaining or abusing power. As a SCOTUS law clerk, Rehnquist famously defended Plessy in the context of the dispute over school segregation, and later was a principal in forcing the liberal Fortas from the high court. Reagan tried to put Bork on the Court, despite (or because of) Bork’s role in helping Nixon obstruct justice in the Watergate matter. Goresuch was a player in the DOJ abetting and covering up the war on terror excesses of the Bush administration.
Honestly I think the more they dig, the more they will find.
ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin’s education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin’s education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow’s
Amazing that this is the prepared response from the Thomas camp.
Here is the entire statement for people who like their hair-splitting in long form.
https://twitter.com/markpaoletta/status/1654086444594483200?s=61&t=ydUxKpAV-0FqgEaBLt10EA
This seems like it’s getting close to LBJ’s comment about fucking dogs… These arguments by Thomas aren’t a winning thing. The more they discuss this at all, the worse it’s gonna look.
Tune in next week when we find out Harlan Crow paid the bill for Thomas’s mistress to get an abortion.
So naive to believe it will be just one!
Is this a high tech lynching? Just wondering.
Apparently, it never ends.
Ultimately, how can Thomas be punished? I think the only real option here would be to try and get THomas and Crow convicted in a court of law, and maybe have Thomas held without bail so he can’t rule on cases.
The only options for punishing a supreme court justice is impeachment by Congress, or potentially if the court itself decided to implement rules.
Conservatives are perfectly ok eroding the bedrock of the judiciary if they retain power
It’s possible that there are crimes in Thomas’s behavior, but it isn’t obvious that there are. The prospect of him being charged with any crime seems really, really remote. And they would be the sort of crimes, maybe tax stuff, for which nobody gets pre-trial detainment.
The other stuff is bad, but holy shit this is another level.
Like I don’t care what legal maneuvers need to be pulled, this is toss him out on his ass territory. Thomas can not be allowed, under any circumstance, to retain his seat.
“I want you to give so-and-so more money, but don’t put their name on the check or the invoice” is exactly how I handled all of my totally above-board consulting engagements.
I guess it’s possible that there is a crime in this case. If they produced a false invoice to one entity in order to generate the funds to pay Ginni Thomas, that sounds like accounting fraud of one kind or another. But I’m not sure that crime reaches to the Thomases themselves. Seems like it would be Leonard Leo and Kellyanne Conway in jeopardy there.
Maybe not the result you would like, but that still would not be an awful thing.
Oh, I’m for it. Better is the enemy of good!
There’s nothing that can be done in removing him. The GOP refused to convict Shitgibbon of insurrection and treason. There’s no way they’re going to convict Thomas for giving them what they always wanted: a stranglehold on the Supreme Court, gutting the Civil Rights Act and killing Roe. Maybe if they held the Senate and the White House, then they could persuade him to retire and replace him for the optics. But no way in hell they’re going to give Biden an open seat to fill.
It is about time that they make a law requiring any nominated or existing Supreme Court justices to have a law degree from the US and be a member of the bar association of the state they reside in and not be subject to disciplinary actions by their state disciplinary association. (It is actually ridiculous how low the requirements are to become a Supreme Court justice right now for a lifetime appointment no less).
That would be one way to remove a Supreme Court Justice without impeachment but yeah the Republicans would then try to get disclipinary actions on all justices appointed by Democrats and ignore any attempt at discipling justices appointed by Republicans sigh.
I don’t think you can use law to define eligibility requirements for Supreme Court justices. The Constitution says they must be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, but places no other restrictions on who can serve. But I suppose it’s an open question. Of course, if the Court doesn’t like your new requirements, they can just strike them down. The Constitution does say that the only way you can remove them is impeachment, so a law designed to remove them through a back-door eligibility requirement is probably plainly unconstitutional.
I think you’re correct. Historically, I believe that attempts to add any sort of additional restrictions to any office specified in the Constitution, have been held as unconstitutional.
And really, for the most part I think that’s good, because you wouldn’t want Congress to be able to pass laws that cut people out of government.