Alito displayed a “stop the steal” symbol at his home

[Anonymous]

Our Founding Fathers wanted SCOTUS justice terms to be able to span beyond presidential appointments but clearly they didn't take things like corruption or senility into account.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our Founding Fathers wanted SCOTUS justice terms to be able to span beyond presidential appointments but clearly they didn't take things like corruption or senility into account.

Too bad the "self-policing" ethics code is all they've got. As long as they have that, we'll be having monthly scandals from Alito and Thomas and their grifting insurrectionist loving ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our Founding Fathers wanted SCOTUS justice terms to be able to span beyond presidential appointments but clearly they didn't take things like corruption or senility into account.

Too bad the "self-policing" ethics code is all they've got. As long as they have that, we'll be having monthly scandals from Alito and Thomas and their grifting insurrectionist loving ways.

Jamie Raskin wrote about this last week. He thinks the DOJ could actually force the justices to recuse as a matter of law.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/29/opinion/alito-thomas-recuse-trump-jan-6.html

Many people have gloomily accepted the conventional wisdom that because there is no binding Supreme Court ethics code, there is no way to force Associate Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas to recuse themselves from the Jan. 6 cases that are before the court.

Justices Alito and Thomas are probably making the same assumption.

But all of them are wrong.

It seems unfathomable that the two justices could get away with deciding for themselves whether they can be impartial in ruling on cases affecting Donald Trump’s liability for crimes he is accused of committing on Jan. 6. Justice Thomas’s wife, Ginni Thomas, was deeply involved in the Jan. 6 “stop the steal” movement. Above the Virginia home of Justice Alito and his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, flew an upside-down American flag — a strong political statement among the people who stormed the Capitol. Above the Alitos’ beach home in New Jersey flew another flag that has been adopted by groups opposed to President Biden.

Justices Alito and Thomas face a groundswell of appeals beseeching them not to participate in Trump v. United States, the case that will decide whether Mr. Trump enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution, and Fischer v. United States, which will decide whether Jan. 6 insurrectionists — and Mr. Trump — can be charged under a statute that criminalizes “corruptly” obstructing an official proceeding. (Justice Alito said on Wednesday that he would not recuse himself from Jan. 6-related cases.)

Everyone assumes that nothing can be done about the recusal situation because the highest court in the land has the lowest ethical standards — no binding ethics code or process outside of personal reflection. Each justice decides for him- or herself whether he or she can be impartial.

Of course, Justices Alito and Thomas could choose to recuse themselves — wouldn’t that be nice? But begging them to do the right thing misses a far more effective course of action.

The U.S. Department of Justice — including the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, an appointed U.S. special counsel and the solicitor general, all of whom were involved in different ways in the criminal prosecutions underlying these cases and are opposing Mr. Trump’s constitutional and statutory claims — can petition the other seven justices to require Justices Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves not as a matter of grace but as a matter of law.

The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland can invoke two powerful textual authorities for this motion: the Constitution of the United States, specifically the due process clause, and the federal statute mandating judicial disqualification for questionable impartiality, 28 U.S.C. Section 455. The Constitution has come into play in several recent Supreme Court decisions striking down rulings by stubborn judges in lower courts whose political impartiality has been reasonably questioned but who threw caution to the wind to hear a case anyway. This statute requires potentially biased judges throughout the federal system to recuse themselves at the start of the process to avoid judicial unfairness and embarrassing controversies and reversals.

[Anonymous]

Not a surprise. But seems that Alito’s account may not be factual.

Alito thinks the Trump conviction will have pushed this out of the news. Hope not.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/05/justice-alito-flags-unanswered-questions/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://dnyuz.com/2024/05/16/at-justice-alitos-house-a-stop-the-steal-symbol-on-display/

How are Alito and Thomas still on the court?

Life appointments!

That needs to end. Maybe Justices should be limited to 20 years or 75 years of age, whichever comes first.

Yes the whole life time appointment is so anti democratic. It reeks of royalists. All the other branches have some accountability to the people(at least in theory though maybe not in practice- gerrymandering, senators unequal representation, capping the number of house seats, etc). The judiciary has no accountability and not connection to the people.

[Anonymous]

The Supreme Court has lost all credibility, but this corrupt, biased, reactionary majority is the way SCOTUS operated for most of U.S. history. The Warren Court was an anomaly that tricked reformers into relying on federal courts for Justice. The courts exist first and foremost to protect the interests of the conservative establishment at the expense of everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a surprise. But seems that Alito’s account may not be factual.

Alito thinks the Trump conviction will have pushed this out of the news. Hope not.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/05/justice-alito-flags-unanswered-questions/

If Alito lied in his letter to Congress can he be held accountable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a surprise. But seems that Alito’s account may not be factual.

Alito thinks the Trump conviction will have pushed this out of the news. Hope not.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/05/justice-alito-flags-unanswered-questions/

I don’t think anyone is surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a surprise. But seems that Alito’s account may not be factual.

Alito thinks the Trump conviction will have pushed this out of the news. Hope not.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/05/justice-alito-flags-unanswered-questions/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a surprise. But seems that Alito’s account may not be factual.

Alito thinks the Trump conviction will have pushed this out of the news. Hope not.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/05/justice-alito-flags-unanswered-questions/

The yawning chasm of silence from the GOP tells on them again.

[Anonymous]

Alito once again shows he’s neither impartial nor fit to serve. Did Alito’s wife make him say this:

Justice Samuel Alito spoke candidly about the ideological battle between the left and the right — discussing the difficulty of living “peacefully” with ideological opponents in the face of “fundamental” differences that “can’t be compromised.” He endorsed what his interlocutor described as a necessary fight to “return our country to a place of godliness.” And Alito offered a blunt assessment of how America’s polarization will ultimately be resolved: “One side or the other is going to win.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Alito once again shows he’s neither impartial nor fit to serve. Did Alito’s wife make him say this:

Justice Samuel Alito spoke candidly about the ideological battle between the left and the right — discussing the difficulty of living “peacefully” with ideological opponents in the face of “fundamental” differences that “can’t be compromised.” He endorsed what his interlocutor described as a necessary fight to “return our country to a place of godliness.” And Alito offered a blunt assessment of how America’s polarization will ultimately be resolved: “One side or the other is going to win.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/samuel-alito-supreme-court-justice-recording-tape-battle-1235036470/

And one of the leading MAGA Catholics in the US is showing his true colors-namely bigotry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Alito once again shows he’s neither impartial nor fit to serve. Did Alito’s wife make him say this:

Justice Samuel Alito spoke candidly about the ideological battle between the left and the right — discussing the difficulty of living “peacefully” with ideological opponents in the face of “fundamental” differences that “can’t be compromised.” He endorsed what his interlocutor described as a necessary fight to “return our country to a place of godliness.” And Alito offered a blunt assessment of how America’s polarization will ultimately be resolved: “One side or the other is going to win.”

Here's the link of Lauren Windsor recording Alito a d Roberts at a SC dinner. Alito is showing the real Alito'.

https://l.smartnews.com/p-45XMX/HRghMP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alito once again shows he’s neither impartial nor fit to serve. Did Alito’s wife make him say this:

Justice Samuel Alito spoke candidly about the ideological battle between the left and the right — discussing the difficulty of living “peacefully” with ideological opponents in the face of “fundamental” differences that “can’t be compromised.” He endorsed what his interlocutor described as a necessary fight to “return our country to a place of godliness.” And Alito offered a blunt assessment of how America’s polarization will ultimately be resolved: “One side or the other is going to win.”

Here's the link of Lauren Windsor recording Alito a d Roberts at a SC dinner. Alito is showing the real Alito'.

https://l.smartnews.com/p-45XMX/HRghMP

That man is certifiable.

[Anonymous]

Sad we have a bigot Christian nationalist as the final arbiter of our nation's laws.

Samuel Alito’s Wife, Martha-Ann, Goes Full MAGA in Secret Recording

https://www.thedailybeast.com/samuel-alitos-wife-martha-ann-goes-full-maga-in-secret-recording?ref=home?ref=home


Martha-Ann Alito, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, complained about the Pride flag, ranted about “feminazis,” and explained a flag design that she has been creating in her head in anticipation of when her husband is “free of this nonsense,” according to undercover audio released by a journalist and documentary filmmaker Monday on X.

“I want a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag, because I have to look across the lagoon at the Pride flag for the next month,” Alito griped at one point.

Alito’s comments were recorded undercover June 3 at the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual dinner by Lauren Windsor, who was playing the role of a conservative activist.

Just hours earlier on Monday, Windsor posted another secretly recorded conversation she had had at the dinner with Alito’s husband. That audio was obtained and published by Rolling Stone. In his comments, the embattled jurist described “fundamental” differences between the left and right-wing that “can’t be compromised,” and expressed a desire to “return our country to a place of godliness.”