The Supreme Court and Chief Justice John Roberts want us to believe that the big story coming out of the nation’s top judicial body is that a thorough internal investigation has failed to reveal the identity of the “Dobbs leaker”—i.e., the individual who provided an advance copy of the bombshell opinion
How stupid does SCOTUS think the American people are? That this kind of "investigation" is even acceptable? What a sham. Thank you for a thorough analysis of this disturbing situation!
Whether anything at all comes of the SCOTUS leaks, or Trump's January 6th incitement, or the House GOP connivance in attempting to overturn the election, we have learned beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is one rule of law in this country for the average citizen, and something absolutely and completely different for the privileged and powerful.
But it is acceptable. Clearly. Because there will be no consequences to the Justices.
Folks can handwring and complain all they want. But when a crime comes with no actual penalty for the criminal then the criminal is quite right in their belief that they can do whatever they want.
I fully get why Ford pardoned Nixon. At the time there were other serious things that needed attention that weren't going to get it as long as EVERYTHING was Nixon/Watergate. And there were legitimate concerns about the overall affect a drawn out prosecution of Nixon (Nixon would make sure it was as difficult and contentious as possible) would do to the country. So Ford removed that from the table.
But
In hindsight, although it would have been a trauma to go through, it's easy to trace a direct line from Nixon paying no penalty through the Clinton era witch hunts and impeachment through Newt Gingrich's tactics through the Tea Party to today. Where the Republicans can blatantly cheer on and HELP a violent attempt to overthrown the government and be put in charge of the House.
The pardoning of Nixon only showed the Republicans that there are no consequences to committing serious crimes, and they have taken that as their core policy.
If ever there was a reason to dismiss the validity of a court, the overt partisanship of the Roberts Court is blatant. The non-investigative investigation is the final straw. SCOTUS must be overhauled. The absolute minimum is an ironclad code of ethics.
This simply puts more emphasis on what is missing in the framework of our government, which is the details of how to handle edge cases. Other systems have ways for the people to recall representatives. We have no way to get rid of a rogue justice, and they get to make their own rules (house rules, separate health plan, salaries, optional ethics board). I understand that judges can't be impartial with their judgeship threatened in any way, but there should at least be some accountability for ethics violations.
I think this is an excellent point. The edge cases have become the mainstream issues now. Rogue justices. Extremist, stacked committees. Presidents who grift and lie non-stop. Fraudulent fabulists in Congress. It goes on and on. There’s so much that we can’t find what is normal anymore for all the shit that has flooded the zone.
Just today I heard a discussion on NPR regarding the trend to classify way more documents than should be (there are tens of millions apparently), with the concurrent trend by lawmakers and politicians to create less documentation about their own actions should they ever be scrutinized later -- simply don't create them in the first place! Our government is increasingly less accountable in every way imaginable.
Yep, that transparently dodgy report is but a footnote to the real issue, as Lawrence Tribe eloquently describes; with a nonsense-riddled sham ofna report like that, they would have been better served issuing no report than a product that announces itself as utter codswallop.
I will have to check out "Togethering", thank you. I laud the goals & processes of Togethering but, a different type of process such as an internal SCOTUS' security investigation that leaves out justices & their spouses is worthless. The intensive look at SCOTUS employees that does NOT & in fact, did NOT examine the relationships between groups that meet with justices at social events for more than tea & crumpets is also worthless. This "investigation" is a sham as NO high-up SCOTUS leaks, inadvertent or otherwise were inspected.
After Justice Roberts indignantly impugned the integrity and reputations of the court clerks and personnel, they have been exonerated. Is he willing (hypophora here) to turn the same defamatory language in the direction it belongs? I think not.
Once again, the Roberts' Kangaroo Court has proven itself to be run by a highly partisan and deeply unqualified and untrustworthy majority. These despicable hacks deserve ZERO RESPECT as they prove over and over that they should have NEVER been allowed to sit on the bench and certainly not on the (formerly) Supreme Court. This Kangaroo court should not be called Supreme until these hacks are no longer the majority.
An obvious coverup, duh. At first I thought it was Alito or Thomas's clerk and was given permission by either of them to do it...so as not to leave a real discoverable trail. An SC clerkship is a coveted ticket to legal riches or paradise, whatever, and omerta would not be demanded, but just expected. So now with their "investigation," we can only surmise that Ginni was probably shooting her mouth off at a dinner party in pre-orgasmic ecstasy. At least that's how I see it.
Suppose they definitively identify one or more leakers.
Then what?
If it is a justice, he'll be reviled, but he has a lifetime appointment.
Can't be impeached, because it is not an impeachable offense.
Even if the House was to impeach anyway, 67 Senate votes do not exist to convict.
What if it is an aide, staffer, or clerk?
The worst that happens is to they're let go. But it is not a crime to just pass a draft document to the press. There is no rule being violated, just a norm.
Right? The above is my guess, a constitutional lawyer can shed some light.
... especially liked that quote from Professor Lawrence (sp?) Tribe at the very end - who always gets to the very heart of the matter; & Yes, some of us most definitely noticed the "Irony" he's pointing out ... I'm getting increasingly disgusted with the current SCOTUS - & No, I do not think we should pressure the 2 other women (appointed prior to Biden) to retire early to make space for younger Justices - just because the Democrats have the Majority in the Senate right now ... We don't yet know if Biden's going to run again - but we should support Justices Kagan & Sotomayor serving as long as they can - & instead figure out some way to 'rein in' Clarence Thomas & Samuel Alito : the 2 most deeply & dangerously "offensive" (& potentially 'damaging' ) Justices that now have 'Lifetime appointments' to the SCOTUS ... which is why they seem to think (& act) like they can do whatever they're inclined to, & we're just 'stuck' living under their dreadful Edicts ... as if they, themselves, constitute a 9-member "Monarchy" ... NOT !!!!
How stupid does SCOTUS think the American people are? That this kind of "investigation" is even acceptable? What a sham. Thank you for a thorough analysis of this disturbing situation!
Whether anything at all comes of the SCOTUS leaks, or Trump's January 6th incitement, or the House GOP connivance in attempting to overturn the election, we have learned beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is one rule of law in this country for the average citizen, and something absolutely and completely different for the privileged and powerful.
But it is acceptable. Clearly. Because there will be no consequences to the Justices.
Folks can handwring and complain all they want. But when a crime comes with no actual penalty for the criminal then the criminal is quite right in their belief that they can do whatever they want.
And I presume we paid for it.
Just like we paid for the lack of accountablility of Nixon with Trump.
Yeah.
I fully get why Ford pardoned Nixon. At the time there were other serious things that needed attention that weren't going to get it as long as EVERYTHING was Nixon/Watergate. And there were legitimate concerns about the overall affect a drawn out prosecution of Nixon (Nixon would make sure it was as difficult and contentious as possible) would do to the country. So Ford removed that from the table.
But
In hindsight, although it would have been a trauma to go through, it's easy to trace a direct line from Nixon paying no penalty through the Clinton era witch hunts and impeachment through Newt Gingrich's tactics through the Tea Party to today. Where the Republicans can blatantly cheer on and HELP a violent attempt to overthrown the government and be put in charge of the House.
The pardoning of Nixon only showed the Republicans that there are no consequences to committing serious crimes, and they have taken that as their core policy.
Right on, Professor Tribe!
The Extreme Court is a shambles thanks to Thomas and Alito and of course Rump for the 3 newbies masquerading as "impartial" justices.
Shame, Shame, Shame on the Extreme 6, and the Extreme Thomas Spouse.
If ever there was a reason to dismiss the validity of a court, the overt partisanship of the Roberts Court is blatant. The non-investigative investigation is the final straw. SCOTUS must be overhauled. The absolute minimum is an ironclad code of ethics.
This simply puts more emphasis on what is missing in the framework of our government, which is the details of how to handle edge cases. Other systems have ways for the people to recall representatives. We have no way to get rid of a rogue justice, and they get to make their own rules (house rules, separate health plan, salaries, optional ethics board). I understand that judges can't be impartial with their judgeship threatened in any way, but there should at least be some accountability for ethics violations.
I think this is an excellent point. The edge cases have become the mainstream issues now. Rogue justices. Extremist, stacked committees. Presidents who grift and lie non-stop. Fraudulent fabulists in Congress. It goes on and on. There’s so much that we can’t find what is normal anymore for all the shit that has flooded the zone.
Just today I heard a discussion on NPR regarding the trend to classify way more documents than should be (there are tens of millions apparently), with the concurrent trend by lawmakers and politicians to create less documentation about their own actions should they ever be scrutinized later -- simply don't create them in the first place! Our government is increasingly less accountable in every way imaginable.
Yep, that transparently dodgy report is but a footnote to the real issue, as Lawrence Tribe eloquently describes; with a nonsense-riddled sham ofna report like that, they would have been better served issuing no report than a product that announces itself as utter codswallop.
I will have to check out "Togethering", thank you. I laud the goals & processes of Togethering but, a different type of process such as an internal SCOTUS' security investigation that leaves out justices & their spouses is worthless. The intensive look at SCOTUS employees that does NOT & in fact, did NOT examine the relationships between groups that meet with justices at social events for more than tea & crumpets is also worthless. This "investigation" is a sham as NO high-up SCOTUS leaks, inadvertent or otherwise were inspected.
Codswallup... I don’t think I’ve heard that term outside of Harry Potter.
Sometimes our lexicon feels so inadequate given the present circumstances...
After Justice Roberts indignantly impugned the integrity and reputations of the court clerks and personnel, they have been exonerated. Is he willing (hypophora here) to turn the same defamatory language in the direction it belongs? I think not.
"Rules for thee but not for Me"
One minor quibble—Moore v. Harper, which will be decided this year, is certainly as consequential as Dobbs.
Absolutely agree!
Yes.
No one at the top is held accountable for anything these days. We all know it was one of the justices (or their spouse- looking at you, Ginny).
Equal justice for all? Nah. Blame the inderlings!
Spot on Jay, once again, a whole lot of clarity.
Once again, the Roberts' Kangaroo Court has proven itself to be run by a highly partisan and deeply unqualified and untrustworthy majority. These despicable hacks deserve ZERO RESPECT as they prove over and over that they should have NEVER been allowed to sit on the bench and certainly not on the (formerly) Supreme Court. This Kangaroo court should not be called Supreme until these hacks are no longer the majority.
Great observation.
An obvious coverup, duh. At first I thought it was Alito or Thomas's clerk and was given permission by either of them to do it...so as not to leave a real discoverable trail. An SC clerkship is a coveted ticket to legal riches or paradise, whatever, and omerta would not be demanded, but just expected. So now with their "investigation," we can only surmise that Ginni was probably shooting her mouth off at a dinner party in pre-orgasmic ecstasy. At least that's how I see it.
Suppose they definitively identify one or more leakers.
Then what?
If it is a justice, he'll be reviled, but he has a lifetime appointment.
Can't be impeached, because it is not an impeachable offense.
Even if the House was to impeach anyway, 67 Senate votes do not exist to convict.
What if it is an aide, staffer, or clerk?
The worst that happens is to they're let go. But it is not a crime to just pass a draft document to the press. There is no rule being violated, just a norm.
Right? The above is my guess, a constitutional lawyer can shed some light.
... especially liked that quote from Professor Lawrence (sp?) Tribe at the very end - who always gets to the very heart of the matter; & Yes, some of us most definitely noticed the "Irony" he's pointing out ... I'm getting increasingly disgusted with the current SCOTUS - & No, I do not think we should pressure the 2 other women (appointed prior to Biden) to retire early to make space for younger Justices - just because the Democrats have the Majority in the Senate right now ... We don't yet know if Biden's going to run again - but we should support Justices Kagan & Sotomayor serving as long as they can - & instead figure out some way to 'rein in' Clarence Thomas & Samuel Alito : the 2 most deeply & dangerously "offensive" (& potentially 'damaging' ) Justices that now have 'Lifetime appointments' to the SCOTUS ... which is why they seem to think (& act) like they can do whatever they're inclined to, & we're just 'stuck' living under their dreadful Edicts ... as if they, themselves, constitute a 9-member "Monarchy" ... NOT !!!!