I can’t get over Alito’s gall. It’s not enough to fuck over a large segment of the population. No, everyone has to kiss his ass and THANK him for fucking them over, otherwise he isn’t happy. How dare you question his glorious judgement? Get on yr knees like a proper serf!
I have the feeling that Justice Samuel Alito has never read the Constitution. He forms an opinion on issues long before they come before the Court, and then tries to find previous opinions to support his views without considering the source or the implications of the opinion he's cherry picking from. If he doesn't have an opinion on the matter then all he does is follow Thomas.
Expand the Court to 13 seats. The Grim Reaper is taking too long to cure the problem
The very first section of Article I of the Constitution says:
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
The idea that Congress can't enact a law establishing ethics and disclosure rules of general application to federal judges - including Supreme Court justices - is absurd. Congress had to grant the federal judiciary the authority to adopt rules of evidence and procedure by passing the Rules Enabling Act because of Article I, Section 1. They can sure as hell pass laws to prevent them from taking bribes.
Alito has lost his frigging mind. He is a walking, talking example of tertiary syphilis.
We should be thankful Lord Alito is willing to explain why he is completely above all forms of accountability. Lord Thomas considers us peons too beneath him to be worthy of his notice.
The WSJ has always been a place where business idiots and RW shitbags can whinge about things. My former CEO and ex GE motherfucker (who is both idiot and shitbag) was crying in the WSJ about a decade ago about how special important telecom people (him and his buddies who sank my former employer right into bankruptcy) are out of work and how they need CEO jobs to make their penises feel less than flaccid.
I laughed an evil laugh when that article showed up as I too was a telecom unemployed person looking for a role that suited my skills. At least I didn't crash a company into oblivion, I was just unlucky enough to work there.
You’d think even the WSJ would know that transcribing an aggrieved old man’s complaints isn’t a “scoop.” When Alito signs a deal to host a nightly show on X, now that will be a scoop.
Where is Oscar Wilde when we need him? "Our Samuel Alito Scoop Is No Scandal" has the pomposity and self-blindness he lampooned in The Importance of Being Earnest. "I, thank heavens, have never seen a spade!" could be the epitaph for these WSJ morons.
People determined to see nothing beyond their own circumferences see a "Scoop" in an ass-kissing interview, but none of the spades the rest of us contend with thanks to their selfishness.
scotus has at least 2 (thomas & alito) members that pretty much define the word ‘’corrupt’’ … roberts wife’s commercial ties to the federalist society are suspect … we only need DoJ to grow a set to investigate (took DoJ 2 years for trump) … or sweep a D majority into power w/ votes …
"Despite his condescending dismissal of the liberal women on the Court, I’m certain Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson have at least read Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution — the part that clearly says “the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.” "
I could make the argument that Article III, Section 2, is limited to "jurisdiction", and not to ethics or other issues. I could further make the argument that this is a stronger position than their dismissal of half of the Second Amendment. I could probably also predict that someone smarter than me can rip my arguments apart, and also that I will find the counterargument in an hour or so. In the real world, however, I suspect that we will all be told to pound it if anybody tries to promote an ethical for these characters.
The fact that federal judges serve during "good behaviour", which is nowhere defined, coupled with Article I, Section 1's exclusive grant of legislative power to Congress, at least strongly implies that Congress has the right to pass legislation stating what is meant by "good behaviour". Congress is also entitled to define what sorts of bad behavior might cause Congress to impeach and remove the bastards and to set such such prophylactic reporting requirements as would assist Congress in the exercise of this function.
In short, Alito has brain worms and shouldn't be ruling on an appeal of a parking ticket, much less matters of national importance.
It's breathtaking just how fascist the six Nuremberg Justices are. You can not cloak your deceit in "Originalism" when your decisions ignore the original text when it is inconvenient for your desired outcome.
I can’t get over Alito’s gall. It’s not enough to fuck over a large segment of the population. No, everyone has to kiss his ass and THANK him for fucking them over, otherwise he isn’t happy. How dare you question his glorious judgement? Get on yr knees like a proper serf!
I have the feeling that Justice Samuel Alito has never read the Constitution. He forms an opinion on issues long before they come before the Court, and then tries to find previous opinions to support his views without considering the source or the implications of the opinion he's cherry picking from. If he doesn't have an opinion on the matter then all he does is follow Thomas.
Expand the Court to 13 seats. The Grim Reaper is taking too long to cure the problem
"but Aulus Plautius once declared, “I am Rome!” and he didn’t have half the ego of Samuel Alito."
Donald Trump has been seeing himself as America since his presidential election and his ego makes it look as if though Samuel Alito has none.
I don't think Alito deserves an excuse like tertiary syphilis. He's just an evil, unethical pile of shit. Another obituary to look forward to.
Conservative judicial philosophies are just contrived rules for interpreting the law that are reverse engineered from desired results.
The very first section of Article I of the Constitution says:
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
The idea that Congress can't enact a law establishing ethics and disclosure rules of general application to federal judges - including Supreme Court justices - is absurd. Congress had to grant the federal judiciary the authority to adopt rules of evidence and procedure by passing the Rules Enabling Act because of Article I, Section 1. They can sure as hell pass laws to prevent them from taking bribes.
Alito has lost his frigging mind. He is a walking, talking example of tertiary syphilis.
Congress can also withhold funding from the Supreme Court.
We should be thankful Lord Alito is willing to explain why he is completely above all forms of accountability. Lord Thomas considers us peons too beneath him to be worthy of his notice.
The WSJ has always been a place where business idiots and RW shitbags can whinge about things. My former CEO and ex GE motherfucker (who is both idiot and shitbag) was crying in the WSJ about a decade ago about how special important telecom people (him and his buddies who sank my former employer right into bankruptcy) are out of work and how they need CEO jobs to make their penises feel less than flaccid.
I laughed an evil laugh when that article showed up as I too was a telecom unemployed person looking for a role that suited my skills. At least I didn't crash a company into oblivion, I was just unlucky enough to work there.
You’d think even the WSJ would know that transcribing an aggrieved old man’s complaints isn’t a “scoop.” When Alito signs a deal to host a nightly show on X, now that will be a scoop.
Who the hell is going to give you a half-million dollar vacation if you put the law and the Constitution ahead of your personal power?
Where is Oscar Wilde when we need him? "Our Samuel Alito Scoop Is No Scandal" has the pomposity and self-blindness he lampooned in The Importance of Being Earnest. "I, thank heavens, have never seen a spade!" could be the epitaph for these WSJ morons.
People determined to see nothing beyond their own circumferences see a "Scoop" in an ass-kissing interview, but none of the spades the rest of us contend with thanks to their selfishness.
"Scoop"
What gets removed from a cat box
What a Wall Street Journal interview with Samuel Alito is called
Secret answer C, "they're the same picture"
"so Alito resolved that if “nobody else is going to do this … I have to defend myself.”"
Hey, Sammy, you are familiar with the maxim that says any one who defends themselves in court has a fool for a client?
scotus has at least 2 (thomas & alito) members that pretty much define the word ‘’corrupt’’ … roberts wife’s commercial ties to the federalist society are suspect … we only need DoJ to grow a set to investigate (took DoJ 2 years for trump) … or sweep a D majority into power w/ votes …
"Despite his condescending dismissal of the liberal women on the Court, I’m certain Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson have at least read Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution — the part that clearly says “the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.” "
Read it...but also oppose it.
They also signed onto the letter rejecting the idea of an eforceable ethics code. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/9-supreme-court-justices-push-back-oversight-raises/story?id=98917921
Alito is atrocious but our gals are not helping.
I could make the argument that Article III, Section 2, is limited to "jurisdiction", and not to ethics or other issues. I could further make the argument that this is a stronger position than their dismissal of half of the Second Amendment. I could probably also predict that someone smarter than me can rip my arguments apart, and also that I will find the counterargument in an hour or so. In the real world, however, I suspect that we will all be told to pound it if anybody tries to promote an ethical for these characters.
The fact that federal judges serve during "good behaviour", which is nowhere defined, coupled with Article I, Section 1's exclusive grant of legislative power to Congress, at least strongly implies that Congress has the right to pass legislation stating what is meant by "good behaviour". Congress is also entitled to define what sorts of bad behavior might cause Congress to impeach and remove the bastards and to set such such prophylactic reporting requirements as would assist Congress in the exercise of this function.
In short, Alito has brain worms and shouldn't be ruling on an appeal of a parking ticket, much less matters of national importance.
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Ain't that the truth!
It's breathtaking just how fascist the six Nuremberg Justices are. You can not cloak your deceit in "Originalism" when your decisions ignore the original text when it is inconvenient for your desired outcome.