If we (depressingly possible) end up with a majority Republican legislature again, I foresee certain Democrats gleefully stating “You’re fine with this, riiiight?” as they plan turnabout. I’m kidding, the Democrats are generally willing to be the adults in most cases, but it would be appropriate.
But no, I think our system is too far gone to actually fix anything, much less the SCOTUS. Because if it were me, and I could get a simple majority in Congress, I’d just cut the SCOTUS funding for everything but security (and only because I was afraid of our liberal members being murdered) to the bare minimums. Which I’ve mentioned before. They have life appointments, they don’t need much money, perks, etc. They can drive and submit an expense report for milage and a small per diem like the rest of us plebs.
Yes, I know that will also never happen, but one can dream.
Article III, Section 1 holds that the judges “receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office”.
I’d tend to think that would apply to both salary and benefits.
So you’d need more than a simply majority in Congress - you’d have to go through the amendment process.
One, as I repeatedly mentioned, it’s not like I thought it would happen, but 2 anything that isn’t direct compensation I can cut by that argument - staff, office space (3x3 meter cube is fine) and the like.
So instead we have a situation where someone appearing before the court could hand one of the justices a shopping bag full of cash and there’s nothing anyone could do about it. And that’s to ensure the independence of the court?
Thomas is giving off strong vibes of “How dare you judge me!” when everyone is just pointing out that, oh wait, anyone else not in the SCOTUS would be out the door with just a TENTH of these “corrections” and “revelations”.
He makes me sick. And yes, I am holding myself back because this isn’t the Pit. Feel free to add language, non-serious threats, and other fully justified utter loathing beyond the self-induced filters.
You’d think they never heard of the idea that you ought to “avoid the appearance of impropriety.” Boy, I wonder what it would be like to be that arrogant - and to have the power and insulation that allows it.
I’ve lost track of whether or not this part is new, but …
I’m sorry, but I’m genuinely NOT going to enumerate all the various ways this is horseshit.
Instead, I’ll just add this:
“Ma? It’s me, Clarence. You still got that Glock I gave you? Hold on tight to it, because you live in the hood. You got it?”
and
“I just happen to have a very close friend who was thoughtful enough, affluent enough, and generous enough to help me ensure that my mother lives out her latter years in danger and in squalor.”
The cynicism of these people. They’re becoming so painfully brazen. They’re just perennially probing the depths of their supporters’ credulity, almost daring them to raise an eyebrow.
I suppose I should not be surprised there is more. How much evidence does it take before something is done? Wisconsin republicans are seriously looking to impeach a supreme court justice for far less.
The Supreme Court is effectively untouchable. The last time an impeachment proceeding was brought against a Justice (and the only time), it was in 1805 against Samuel Chase, and Chase was acquitted. You’re more likely to successfully impeach the POTUS than a member of the SCOTUS.
