SCOTUS Watch Thread

Joined
Jun 15, 2018
Messages
3,170
Reputation
570
Daps
14,658
I may be a minority opinion in considering ACB a swing justice. Before her nomination, when I was reading about the cult she grew up in, I thought she would be an absolute lunatic.

But she, along with Roberts and Kavanaugh, strikes me as a swing, or at least more swingy than Gorsuch.

I don't have much evidence to back me up other than the link below, but I still consider her more likely to side with the liberals than Gorsuch.


I feel like there’s been a push lately to re-define swing justice. O’Connor and Whyte were actual swing justices where it wasn’t rare to see them not adhere to party orthodoxy. The Supreme Court has tilted so far right that justices who vote party line 95% of the time are getting the label.

I don’t think there’s a swing justice on the court. The occasional, vote w/ the liberals on a super racist, sexist opinions when it has no bearing on the controlling opinion does not make a justice a swing justice.
 

wire28

Blade said what up
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
50,405
Reputation
12,021
Daps
186,541
Reppin
#ByrdGang #TheColi
I feel like there’s been a push lately to re-define swing justice. O’Connor and Whyte were actual swing justices where it wasn’t rare to see them not adhere to party orthodoxy. The Supreme Court has tilted so far right that justices who vote party line 95% of the time are getting the label.

I don’t think there’s a swing justice on the court. The occasional, vote w/ the liberals on a super racist, sexist opinions when it has no bearing on the controlling opinion does not make a justice a swing justice.
Agreed. We can’t use alito and Thomas as a bar to define swing. There are no swings. There are just people taking turns on when to show a semblance of sanity and empathy before it’s the next guys turn and they revert back to being crazy.
 

Professor Emeritus

Veteran
Poster of the Year
Supporter
Joined
Jan 5, 2015
Messages
50,687
Reputation
19,571
Daps
201,890
Reppin
the ether
Any "reasonable" decisions that have been issued lately are almost purely the result of the court's conservatives wanting to project a veneer of being nonpartisan/moderate to distract from all of the corruption stories. They are as political as anyone.

That would be nicely showing the corruption stories were effective in at least something then.

I don't buy this as "cover for following rulings". If they look like hacks on the biggest cases, no one will give a shyt what they did with the little cases.
 

the cac mamba

Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
99,151
Reputation
13,401
Daps
289,400
Reppin
NULL
im all for going after these clowns for corruption, but show me the cash payments. not experiences :dead:

flying alito out like an IG thot to go on a fishing trip, is negligible evidence of corruption. dude even came with paperwork how it was cheaper for the government for him to hop on the private plane
 

DrBanneker

Space is the Place
Joined
Jan 23, 2016
Messages
5,490
Reputation
4,496
Daps
18,818
Reppin
Figthing borg at Wolf 359
im all for going after these clowns for corruption, but show me the cash payments. not experiences :dead:

flying alito out like an IG thot to go on a fishing trip, is negligible evidence of corruption. dude even came with paperwork how it was cheaper for the government for him to hop on the private plane

I worked in international business and in US anti-bribery/corruption law for dealing with foreign officials, "in-kind", services, or other non-cash transactions were crimes that could be prosecuted under the FCPA (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act). If I flew a foreign government official to a fishing trip and paid for accommodations to get a deal I could potentially be fined and go to jail.

To be honest, only the most stupid and unsophisticated bribery is done with straight up cash. A lot of congressional corruption in both parties seems to be tied to insider trading or investment advice where no cash changes hand but millions are made. In Brazil, letting someone in the government use a nice ocean front condo in Rio was a common kickback. In China, people would sponsor trips to casinos for government officials and pay off the house to let them 'win'.

Things like ACB's house getting bought by the Notre Dame professor are much bigger red flags and things they should know better. Even if they feel the transaction or trip is ok, you could open yourself up to blackmail.
 

the cac mamba

Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
99,151
Reputation
13,401
Daps
289,400
Reppin
NULL
I worked in international business and in US anti-bribery/corruption law for dealing with foreign officials, "in-kind", services, or other non-cash transactions were crimes that could be prosecuted under the FCPA (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act). If I flew a foreign government official to a fishing trip and paid for accommodations to get a deal I could potentially be fined and go to jail.

To be honest, only the most stupid and unsophisticated bribery is done with straight up cash. A lot of congressional corruption in both parties seems to be tied to insider trading or investment advice where no cash changes hand but millions are made. In Brazil, letting someone in the government use a nice ocean front condo in Rio was a common kickback. In China, people would sponsor trips to casinos for government officials and pay off the house to let them 'win'.

Things like ACB's house getting bought by the Notre Dame professor are much bigger red flags and things they should know better. Even if they feel the transaction or trip is ok, you could open yourself up to blackmail.
we're the party of nancy pelosi :yeshrug: i can barely complain about corruption with a straight face
 
Top