Ask Leonard Leo. He appears to have had the most influence on selection of candidates and placing them on SCOTUS than any single mortal. Prior to reading a report on him just prior to reading your article, I had never heard his name.
I've long been a proponent of term limitations for all government positions. Why should the Supreme Court be any different. As far as I'm aware these are the only positions that are filled by appointment and are for LIFE. We the People have no vote in this matter. If we vote for the President of the United States and our Congressional representatives in National elections then why aren't we afforded the same right when it comes to the Supreme Court. This needs to change.
WE the PEOPLE MUST CHANGE the LAW, and elect all the people !. and the NOTsupreme court is NO DIFFERENT, as a plus they MUST SUBSCRIBE TO ETHICS as the Planners of this Country ORDERED, any corrupt action taken by ANY MEMBER of the NOTsupreme court must be held in JAIL without any (no exceptions) BAIL.. they the NOTsupreme court- CORRUPT ONES- must be HELD RIGHT NOW and be FIRED-- by WE the PEOPLE after all they were appointed, so we must hold the POWER over them and not their RIGHT WING BOSSES.- WE the PEOPLE must elect people to do the job of governing--- and not people like d. j. "trump" the Hump! or people associated with him like MAGA or "Rapethepublicans Greedy OLD Pricks party" (aka Republicans) we are smarter then them, the ones who are motivated by-- MONEY & POWER. it's past time to show them-------SO DO IT---NOW.
Unethical, unjust, unfair, biased, bought and paid for "justices" who are busy paying off their debts to those who have purchased them with each and every "ruling". They all should have stamps on their heads - "This justice owned by _________"
Via Proxy/Congressional Person, it appears that we did elect the Supreme Court. The problem is that we hired them via their own rules and we seem to be afraid to revise/set rules and make them comply. Otherwise, we will have to become satisfied living under an Autocracy like the Minorities in our country. Bullies are bullies forever (Insert your personal favorite word for bully) .
well one way to make them comply is to FIRE THEM ALL, I know that this very harsh but we must do some thing even if it incorrect at least we can learn from our misteaks, I hope, boy do I hope !
The "Roberts Court " will go down in infamy. I've been going through my old papers, Jim - 2017, 18, 19 -You gave us all we needed to know about this Court. Thank you! They were very infuriating and entertaining reading. Keep it up!
Pro Publica has documented the creation of spurious lawsuits for the purpose of getting the Supreme Court to strike down laws and interpretations of the Constitution that Leonard Leo, the Federalist Society, etc., have targeted:
It is not just lack of judicial impartiality and the lack of understanding of accepting gratuities. At least 2 of our current Supreme Court justices are sexual predators.
and you have not addressed HOW CORRUPT they are. we must take control of the NOTsupreme court and hold them to their OATH OF OFFICE and not allow them to not do as they swore to do!, they also swore to us WE the PEOPLE and the at least six of them(all republican supported)we know who the CROOKS are ane WE must GET THEM OUT OF OFFICE!
EXPAND THE COURT----YES---as for impeachment of "thomas" he is not worth the time, or his wife (ginny). we must FIRE him, he's been bought and paid for---. this must stop,--- all the people with BILLIONS of $ think they can buy anything ---, and it's TIME to show them that they are WRONG-,WRONG-,WRONG- encluding the Big Corps.,Big Pharma.,Big Ag., Big Business and worst of all the UBER-RICH. the working man built this Country and no one else-, the above mentioned provided jobs only NOT HELP!. yes dollars built this Country BUT most of them were TAX DOLLARS--- not from the others--, the working man needed jobs--yes--and were used by the "others" to get rich, and they think they built this Country and they DID NOT! this is what I think so tell me if I'm wrong.
Every current push to "expand the court" has proposed increasing the number of justices on the Supreme Court to 13. It is always an odd number and results in an imbalanced court in favor of either a conservative or liberal leaning court. This approach will never fly, always be opposed by the side that feels they will be at a disadvantage and will continue to cause animosity, distrust and chaos during times of replacing any retiring justice.
The idea I have been proposing for several years would allow for fair and equal conservative vs liberal representation on the court and allow for fair and minimal opposition during nomination and approval of new justices going forward. It also can't be argued as being biased or unfair.
HOW TO IMPROVE THE SUPREME COURT GOING FORWARD
ELIMINATING PARTISANSHIP IN FUTURE COURT NOMINATIONS
With all the recent and past controversy concerning “court packing” and the rancor over court nominations, even preventing nominations from even being given consideration, I would respectfully like to submit an idea to potentially correct these issues going forward. While I don’t claim to fully understand the processes of congress and whether this idea is even constitutionally possible, I hope you may find it interesting and thought provoking.
The makeup of the Supreme Court has always been described as conservative vs liberal members of the court. This has placed an unnecessary and negative political “taint” on their important role in our justice system. In an effort to make the court more balanced, deliberative and less political I would suggest that the court be increased to 12 members.
Having an even number of court members would serve two purposes.
First, would be to encourage liberal and conservative leaning justices to argue their respective ideas concerning cases brought before them and try to convince at least one member of the “opposing” side to come to their way of thinking. If neither side could encourage a majority opinion then the case before them would be undecided and the lower court ruling would stand.
Second, and more importantly, if Democrats were to now nominate and get confirmed three additional justices, the court would have six Democratic and six Republican nominated and confirmed justices on the court. Going forward, when there is a court vacancy, the party that had nominated the outgoing justice position would nominate a new justice. This would always keep the court equally balanced and would prevent future court vacancies from being blocked or stalled no matter which party was in control of the Senate at the time of the vacancy.
In my opinion this updated process would neither “pack” nor “unpack” the court. It would be equalizing the court going forward and also help remove the contentious rancor and debate that currently surrounds Supreme Court nominations.
I think this is a good idea, and it might work, the only thing standing in the way is getting the Party's to agree to this-------and I'm sure that you know there is one Party that will not even agree to anything--- not even who/what they are.------- SOME PROBLEM YOU HAVE ?
If you look closely at the court, "Injustices by Ian Millhiser" for example, you'll find that SCOTUS has not been a friend of the American people a great deal of the time. To put things in perspective, the Court and its Justices are, in a real sense, in charge of our posterity. In this sense, they have great responsibilities and great power. Given that they are not elected, are appointed for life and can only be removed by impeachment, they can act in any fashion they choose with impunity.
They are in perfect positions to be the subjects of all types of persuasive methods outside the realm of debate. They need not want for almost anything. Their wish(es) our simply commands for those wanting/needing to influence the Court regardless of likely effects of their rulings with regard to justice and/or the common good.
Consider the Court's recent overturn of Roe vs. Wade that quite literally takes away a person's right to managed their own health care, specifically a female's right to terminate a pregnancy. Those who championed this decision where in the main religious groups who advocated that only God has the right to abort the fetus or terminate the child. Otherwise, it is murder!
At this juncture, let me say that once you introduce "God" into the proceedings because religion is not hard science. It is at best a tool to socialize mankind and subject to all of man's darker angels. To make this short, it seems reasonable (there is little reason in all of this except that people like need to dominate others) that the female only say, I prayed to God for guidance and God said to me, do what you must do to be healthy in mind and body!
To close, this "One Nation Under God" is OK if this "God" is fair, is just, is color/gender/race/ethnic blind. However, the evidence is clear, this nation and all nations have issues where one group is favored over others. This alone suggests that "God" is in the mind of the beholder and this can not be a crutch that the Court is fond of hanging onto as well as most of our governing institutions. In this sense, the court's Roman Catholic majority should recuse themselves from anything that the Church has declared "illegal" (against God's law". Of course, to be facetious, these justices should have let Roe vs. Wade stand and for those who felt the need, could have gone to confession.
"GOD" what a joke---a bad one at that. the people that belive in any religion must have a crutch to lean on----no matter how wrong it is----after all they must blame some one, and they do not to blame themselves ---- do they? and now they think they can MOVE THIS TO THE NOTsupreme , court as this will spread the blame around------MAYBE !-----WE the PEOPLE must start over and get it right---this time. ETHICS this time YES, TERM LIMITS YES, ability to FIRE THEM YES, and other things as well, TIME TO START YES, get started ----NOW
The linear vector of Time (& Justice) bulges w/ human development... that is until bursting as that 'stretch' can no-longer sustain! Our SCOTUS-six are the pinpricks of civil dissipation!
I do not think there only six pin pricks in our SCOTUS there may be more if the UBER-RICH of any ilk can buy the court.- as for reporting all their "GIFTS" 45 days will be enough time,- after that fine them $100,000 for every failure to report them (for each "GIFT")-- this should get their attention and we must hold all money due them until they do their job. P.S. this must fine must be charged EVERY MONTH ! and LOOK at their VOTING RECORD as well, and they want to hurt the PEOPLE ----START WITH THEM.
I appreciate this. I also want to know why your newsletter only shows up on my phone and not on my laptop? I’ve checked spam but it’s not there either 🙏
please try the TRASH it must be there some where, also check your phone settings if no luck call the phone company and see if thre can/will help you. GOOD LUCK.
Thomas should put his sponsorship’s on his robe. He’s certified corrupt
Ask Leonard Leo. He appears to have had the most influence on selection of candidates and placing them on SCOTUS than any single mortal. Prior to reading a report on him just prior to reading your article, I had never heard his name.
I've long been a proponent of term limitations for all government positions. Why should the Supreme Court be any different. As far as I'm aware these are the only positions that are filled by appointment and are for LIFE. We the People have no vote in this matter. If we vote for the President of the United States and our Congressional representatives in National elections then why aren't we afforded the same right when it comes to the Supreme Court. This needs to change.
WE the PEOPLE MUST CHANGE the LAW, and elect all the people !. and the NOTsupreme court is NO DIFFERENT, as a plus they MUST SUBSCRIBE TO ETHICS as the Planners of this Country ORDERED, any corrupt action taken by ANY MEMBER of the NOTsupreme court must be held in JAIL without any (no exceptions) BAIL.. they the NOTsupreme court- CORRUPT ONES- must be HELD RIGHT NOW and be FIRED-- by WE the PEOPLE after all they were appointed, so we must hold the POWER over them and not their RIGHT WING BOSSES.- WE the PEOPLE must elect people to do the job of governing--- and not people like d. j. "trump" the Hump! or people associated with him like MAGA or "Rapethepublicans Greedy OLD Pricks party" (aka Republicans) we are smarter then them, the ones who are motivated by-- MONEY & POWER. it's past time to show them-------SO DO IT---NOW.
limits do need to be added, but expansion of the court is the ONLY solution, unless we wanrt 20 more years of this nonsense.
wait a minuet-----don't you mean--- CRAP--- and not nonsense ?
Such situations,unaddressed, make the democratic party look so wimpy.😱😩
Unethical, unjust, unfair, biased, bought and paid for "justices" who are busy paying off their debts to those who have purchased them with each and every "ruling". They all should have stamps on their heads - "This justice owned by _________"
Via Proxy/Congressional Person, it appears that we did elect the Supreme Court. The problem is that we hired them via their own rules and we seem to be afraid to revise/set rules and make them comply. Otherwise, we will have to become satisfied living under an Autocracy like the Minorities in our country. Bullies are bullies forever (Insert your personal favorite word for bully) .
well one way to make them comply is to FIRE THEM ALL, I know that this very harsh but we must do some thing even if it incorrect at least we can learn from our misteaks, I hope, boy do I hope !
The "Roberts Court " will go down in infamy. I've been going through my old papers, Jim - 2017, 18, 19 -You gave us all we needed to know about this Court. Thank you! They were very infuriating and entertaining reading. Keep it up!
Pro Publica has documented the creation of spurious lawsuits for the purpose of getting the Supreme Court to strike down laws and interpretations of the Constitution that Leonard Leo, the Federalist Society, etc., have targeted:
https://www.juancole.com/2023/10/supermajority-remaking-american.html
It is not just lack of judicial impartiality and the lack of understanding of accepting gratuities. At least 2 of our current Supreme Court justices are sexual predators.
Thank you! Absolutely right on!!!
JJY
and you have not addressed HOW CORRUPT they are. we must take control of the NOTsupreme court and hold them to their OATH OF OFFICE and not allow them to not do as they swore to do!, they also swore to us WE the PEOPLE and the at least six of them(all republican supported)we know who the CROOKS are ane WE must GET THEM OUT OF OFFICE!
The Democrats must push for Thomas's impeachment and expand the court.
EXPAND THE COURT----YES---as for impeachment of "thomas" he is not worth the time, or his wife (ginny). we must FIRE him, he's been bought and paid for---. this must stop,--- all the people with BILLIONS of $ think they can buy anything ---, and it's TIME to show them that they are WRONG-,WRONG-,WRONG- encluding the Big Corps.,Big Pharma.,Big Ag., Big Business and worst of all the UBER-RICH. the working man built this Country and no one else-, the above mentioned provided jobs only NOT HELP!. yes dollars built this Country BUT most of them were TAX DOLLARS--- not from the others--, the working man needed jobs--yes--and were used by the "others" to get rich, and they think they built this Country and they DID NOT! this is what I think so tell me if I'm wrong.
Every current push to "expand the court" has proposed increasing the number of justices on the Supreme Court to 13. It is always an odd number and results in an imbalanced court in favor of either a conservative or liberal leaning court. This approach will never fly, always be opposed by the side that feels they will be at a disadvantage and will continue to cause animosity, distrust and chaos during times of replacing any retiring justice.
The idea I have been proposing for several years would allow for fair and equal conservative vs liberal representation on the court and allow for fair and minimal opposition during nomination and approval of new justices going forward. It also can't be argued as being biased or unfair.
HOW TO IMPROVE THE SUPREME COURT GOING FORWARD
ELIMINATING PARTISANSHIP IN FUTURE COURT NOMINATIONS
With all the recent and past controversy concerning “court packing” and the rancor over court nominations, even preventing nominations from even being given consideration, I would respectfully like to submit an idea to potentially correct these issues going forward. While I don’t claim to fully understand the processes of congress and whether this idea is even constitutionally possible, I hope you may find it interesting and thought provoking.
The makeup of the Supreme Court has always been described as conservative vs liberal members of the court. This has placed an unnecessary and negative political “taint” on their important role in our justice system. In an effort to make the court more balanced, deliberative and less political I would suggest that the court be increased to 12 members.
Having an even number of court members would serve two purposes.
First, would be to encourage liberal and conservative leaning justices to argue their respective ideas concerning cases brought before them and try to convince at least one member of the “opposing” side to come to their way of thinking. If neither side could encourage a majority opinion then the case before them would be undecided and the lower court ruling would stand.
Second, and more importantly, if Democrats were to now nominate and get confirmed three additional justices, the court would have six Democratic and six Republican nominated and confirmed justices on the court. Going forward, when there is a court vacancy, the party that had nominated the outgoing justice position would nominate a new justice. This would always keep the court equally balanced and would prevent future court vacancies from being blocked or stalled no matter which party was in control of the Senate at the time of the vacancy.
In my opinion this updated process would neither “pack” nor “unpack” the court. It would be equalizing the court going forward and also help remove the contentious rancor and debate that currently surrounds Supreme Court nominations.
David Smeltzer
LaPorte, CO
I think this is a good idea, and it might work, the only thing standing in the way is getting the Party's to agree to this-------and I'm sure that you know there is one Party that will not even agree to anything--- not even who/what they are.------- SOME PROBLEM YOU HAVE ?
If you look closely at the court, "Injustices by Ian Millhiser" for example, you'll find that SCOTUS has not been a friend of the American people a great deal of the time. To put things in perspective, the Court and its Justices are, in a real sense, in charge of our posterity. In this sense, they have great responsibilities and great power. Given that they are not elected, are appointed for life and can only be removed by impeachment, they can act in any fashion they choose with impunity.
They are in perfect positions to be the subjects of all types of persuasive methods outside the realm of debate. They need not want for almost anything. Their wish(es) our simply commands for those wanting/needing to influence the Court regardless of likely effects of their rulings with regard to justice and/or the common good.
Consider the Court's recent overturn of Roe vs. Wade that quite literally takes away a person's right to managed their own health care, specifically a female's right to terminate a pregnancy. Those who championed this decision where in the main religious groups who advocated that only God has the right to abort the fetus or terminate the child. Otherwise, it is murder!
At this juncture, let me say that once you introduce "God" into the proceedings because religion is not hard science. It is at best a tool to socialize mankind and subject to all of man's darker angels. To make this short, it seems reasonable (there is little reason in all of this except that people like need to dominate others) that the female only say, I prayed to God for guidance and God said to me, do what you must do to be healthy in mind and body!
To close, this "One Nation Under God" is OK if this "God" is fair, is just, is color/gender/race/ethnic blind. However, the evidence is clear, this nation and all nations have issues where one group is favored over others. This alone suggests that "God" is in the mind of the beholder and this can not be a crutch that the Court is fond of hanging onto as well as most of our governing institutions. In this sense, the court's Roman Catholic majority should recuse themselves from anything that the Church has declared "illegal" (against God's law". Of course, to be facetious, these justices should have let Roe vs. Wade stand and for those who felt the need, could have gone to confession.
"GOD" what a joke---a bad one at that. the people that belive in any religion must have a crutch to lean on----no matter how wrong it is----after all they must blame some one, and they do not to blame themselves ---- do they? and now they think they can MOVE THIS TO THE NOTsupreme , court as this will spread the blame around------MAYBE !-----WE the PEOPLE must start over and get it right---this time. ETHICS this time YES, TERM LIMITS YES, ability to FIRE THEM YES, and other things as well, TIME TO START YES, get started ----NOW
'
The linear vector of Time (& Justice) bulges w/ human development... that is until bursting as that 'stretch' can no-longer sustain! Our SCOTUS-six are the pinpricks of civil dissipation!
I do not think there only six pin pricks in our SCOTUS there may be more if the UBER-RICH of any ilk can buy the court.- as for reporting all their "GIFTS" 45 days will be enough time,- after that fine them $100,000 for every failure to report them (for each "GIFT")-- this should get their attention and we must hold all money due them until they do their job. P.S. this must fine must be charged EVERY MONTH ! and LOOK at their VOTING RECORD as well, and they want to hurt the PEOPLE ----START WITH THEM.
I appreciate this. I also want to know why your newsletter only shows up on my phone and not on my laptop? I’ve checked spam but it’s not there either 🙏
please try the TRASH it must be there some where, also check your phone settings if no luck call the phone company and see if thre can/will help you. GOOD LUCK.
We need a law to hold judges accountable for bribery, and corruption, and be able to remove them if they lied when they were being vetted.