No surprise - Clarence Thomas is completely corrupt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

There is a gift limitation, above which it is taxable. In 2022, you could give $16,000 to someone before it became taxable. For 2023, it is $17,000.

Sigh. The person giving the gift pays gift taxes on it if it exceeds a certain amount. Come on people. Explained several times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

DoJ does criminal tax cases. Crow would have had to declare and pay taxes, not Thomas

that's just weird. so you pay taxes when you earn your money, and then pay again when you give it as a gift to somebody? and if all your income were gifts, you would never have to pay taxes? fascinating

Yes. It’s a way to avoid some inheritance taxes —there’s a lifetime limit. 1 million now I think?

[Anonymous]

I think there are probably some IRS agents very curious about Harlan Crow’s charitable donations. And maybe the officer of the law who helped him structure them.

[Anonymous]

I need to write my congress person to ask that the receiver of a gift be required to pay taxes as well. what a crazy income tax loop hole!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I need to write my congress person to ask that the receiver of a gift be required to pay taxes as well. what a crazy income tax loop hole!

Be sure your congressman includes himself. And, while you are at it, tell him to vote for the AOC/Matt Gaetz bill against insider trading by congressmen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

this cannot be true. Even with your own children, if you give them too much, they have to declare it on their taxes as income.

No, they don't. I'm not sure how many times you have to be told this. Gifts are not income. Here's the statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/102#:~:text=Gross%20income%20does%20not%20include,bequest%2C%20devise%2C%20or%20inheritance.&text=where%20the%20gift%2C%20bequest%2C%20devise,the%20amount%20of%20such%20income.

There is a separate thing called the gift tax, but that tax is on the donor not the donee.

The line between a gift and a bribe is not far, and certainly not far at the levels provided to the Thomases. And presumably, we all want our Justices to be bound by the toughest of ethics rules, since their are supposed to be unbiased judges, free of day to day political influences. The FACT is that Thomas is fundamentally corrupt. The FACT is that our elected politicians and our civil servants face tougher rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

There is a gift limitation, above which it is taxable. In 2022, you could give $16,000 to someone before it became taxable. For 2023, it is $17,000.

Sigh. The person giving the gift pays gift taxes on it if it exceeds a certain amount. Come on people. Explained several times.

The recipient does not have to pay taxes on it but they DO still need to report it if it exceeds $17,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

this cannot be true. Even with your own children, if you give them too much, they have to declare it on their taxes as income.

No, they don't. I'm not sure how many times you have to be told this. Gifts are not income. Here's the statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/102#:~:text=Gross%20income%20does%20not%20include,bequest%2C%20devise%2C%20or%20inheritance.&text=where%20the%20gift%2C%20bequest%2C%20devise,the%20amount%20of%20such%20income.

There is a separate thing called the gift tax, but that tax is on the donor not the donee.

The line between a gift and a bribe is not far, and certainly not far at the levels provided to the Thomases. And presumably, we all want our Justices to be bound by the toughest of ethics rules, since their are supposed to be unbiased judges, free of day to day political influences. The FACT is that Thomas is fundamentally corrupt. The FACT is that our elected politicians and our civil servants face tougher rules.

Reminder again that federal employees cannot accept anything of more than $20 in value; and nothing to exceed $50 from a single source in a given year.

The same should apply to EVERYONE in federal government, to include elected officials, appointees and judges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

There is a gift limitation, above which it is taxable. In 2022, you could give $16,000 to someone before it became taxable. For 2023, it is $17,000.

Sigh. The person giving the gift pays gift taxes on it if it exceeds a certain amount. Come on people. Explained several times.

The recipient does not have to pay taxes on it but they DO still need to report it if it exceeds $17,000

Wrong yet again. The giver (not the recipient) has to file a Form 709 (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f709.pdf) You really should refrain from posting on topics you clearly have no clue about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

this cannot be true. Even with your own children, if you give them too much, they have to declare it on their taxes as income.

No, they don't. I'm not sure how many times you have to be told this. Gifts are not income. Here's the statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/102#:~:text=Gross%20income%20does%20not%20include,bequest%2C%20devise%2C%20or%20inheritance.&text=where%20the%20gift%2C%20bequest%2C%20devise,the%20amount%20of%20such%20income.

There is a separate thing called the gift tax, but that tax is on the donor not the donee.

The line between a gift and a bribe is not far, and certainly not far at the levels provided to the Thomases. And presumably, we all want our Justices to be bound by the toughest of ethics rules, since their are supposed to be unbiased judges, free of day to day political influences. The FACT is that Thomas is fundamentally corrupt. The FACT is that our elected politicians and our civil servants face tougher rules.

Reminder again that federal employees cannot accept anything of more than $20 in value; and nothing to exceed $50 from a single source in a given year.

The same should apply to EVERYONE in federal government, to include elected officials, appointees and judges.

Spoken like someone without a friend willing to pay your mother's housing expenses or your nephew's tuition. Be reasonable, judges don't make enough to fly private and commercial is for the poors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I need to write my congress person to ask that the receiver of a gift be required to pay taxes as well. what a crazy income tax loop hole!

Be sure your congressman includes himself. And, while you are at it, tell him to vote for the AOC/Matt Gaetz bill against insider trading by congressmen.

Why is that one better than the one Spanberger already sponsored?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

There is a gift limitation, above which it is taxable. In 2022, you could give $16,000 to someone before it became taxable. For 2023, it is $17,000.

Sigh. The person giving the gift pays gift taxes on it if it exceeds a certain amount. Come on people. Explained several times.

The recipient does not have to pay taxes on it but they DO still need to report it if it exceeds $17,000

Wrong yet again. The giver (not the recipient) has to file a Form 709 (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f709.pdf) You really should refrain from posting on topics you clearly have no clue about.

If you think it's fine for a federal judge to receive a gift with a value in excess of $20, then you are part of the problem.

[Anonymous]

No one thinks that’s fine. But we are clarifying the tax law for you. The gift tax laws have implications for Crow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

There is a gift limitation, above which it is taxable. In 2022, you could give $16,000 to someone before it became taxable. For 2023, it is $17,000.

Sigh. The person giving the gift pays gift taxes on it if it exceeds a certain amount. Come on people. Explained several times.

The recipient does not have to pay taxes on it but they DO still need to report it if it exceeds $17,000

Wrong yet again. The giver (not the recipient) has to file a Form 709 (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f709.pdf) You really should refrain from posting on topics you clearly have no clue about.

If you think it's fine for a federal judge to receive a gift with a value in excess of $20, then you are part of the problem.

Where did I say that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?

No, no one has to report gifts, only income.

Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf

I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.

Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.

does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.

You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.

this cannot be true. Even with your own children, if you give them too much, they have to declare it on their taxes as income.

No, they don't. I'm not sure how many times you have to be told this. Gifts are not income. Here's the statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/102#:~:text=Gross%20income%20does%20not%20include,bequest%2C%20devise%2C%20or%20inheritance.&text=where%20the%20gift%2C%20bequest%2C%20devise,the%20amount%20of%20such%20income.

There is a separate thing called the gift tax, but that tax is on the donor not the donee.

The line between a gift and a bribe is not far, and certainly not far at the levels provided to the Thomases. And presumably, we all want our Justices to be bound by the toughest of ethics rules, since their are supposed to be unbiased judges, free of day to day political influences. The FACT is that Thomas is fundamentally corrupt. The FACT is that our elected politicians and our civil servants face tougher rules.

Reminder again that federal employees cannot accept anything of more than $20 in value; and nothing to exceed $50 from a single source in a given year.

The same should apply to EVERYONE in federal government, to include elected officials, appointees and judges.

Actually, one would think that Judges (and particularly the Justices) should be bound by the toughest of ethics rules.