In case you’ve missed it, wackadoodle Congressional Democrats and all their little minion have been whining about the Supreme Court and Demanding a code of ethics and other stuff (though, they didn’t say anything about Sotomayor’s sweetheart deals and such)
Justice Samuel Alito says Congress lacks the power to impose a code of ethics on the Supreme Court. https://t.co/KdpxEVhZKz
— The Associated Press (@AP) July 29, 2023
From the article
Justice Samuel Alito says Congress lacks the power to impose a code of ethics on the Supreme Court, making him the first member of the court to take a public stand against proposals in Congress to toughen ethics rules for justices in response to increased scrutiny of their activities beyond the bench.
“I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it. No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period,” Alito said in an interview he gave to the Wall Street Journal opinion pages. An account of the interview, which the paper said took place in New York in early July, was published Friday.
Democrats last week pushed Supreme Court ethics legislation through a Senate committee, though the bill’s prospects in the full Senate are dim.
Look, the courts have their own code of ethics, but, if Congress is allowed to regulate SCOTUS, then they are no longer an independent branch of the federal government. There are checks and balances, there are ways to deal with serious criminal violations, but, the Court does not answer to Congress, especially partisan boobs attempting to create an issue where one doesn’t exist because the Court is very much Conservative leaning.
????Justice Alito is absolutely correct:
“‘Congress did not create the Supreme Court’—the Constitution did. ‘I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it,’ he says. ‘No provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period.’” https://t.co/EXdGblYdsL
— Carrie Severino (@JCNSeverino) July 28, 2023
Since a goodly chunk of the Congress critters slurring Alito are lawyers, you’d think they’d know this. They do, but they do not care, nor do many of the peons having snit fits. Like AOC, who says Alito is calling himself a king, but should probably focus on her own ethics violations.
Congress should worry about it’s own ethics problems before worrying about SCOTUS.
Congress needs to worry about the communists NATO American thugs and races in its own ranks they need to worry about organizations like the Black Caucus et cetera we don’t need racists all over the place. America is past racism the only people caring about racism are leftist practicing anti white leftist racism. And it’s way beyond time to throw out all the anti American people out of Congress and that includes the fuckin squad cauz they’re nothing but commie pigs.
America for Americans no more of this bull crap about race or religion or immigrants or any of the other BS America’s here for America. If you don’t freaking like it leave.
The SCROTUS Code of Ethics permits Justices to receive expensive gifts (tuition, luxury vacations, private airfare) from billionaires without disclosure.
It’s unlikely that billionaires are trying to bribe the Court on any particular case, but highly likely they want the Court’s continued favor of the super wealthy.
It’s a good investment, if unseemly.
You mean like Brandon, porkchop?
Bwaha! Lolgf
Article 1, Section 9, states, “No person holding any office of profit or trust
under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”
Read all about it, smellybutt!
But to be honest, the Constitution doesn’t grant the Supreme Court the power to do much of ANYTHING. All the SC’s power and authority come from the Marbury vs Madison case, and various misinterpretations of that in the years following.
William Teach: There are checks and balances, there are ways to deal with serious criminal violations
So, Congress can regulate the Supreme Court. To assert that there is no check on the Supreme Court undermines the notion of checks and balances.
While the Constitution created the Supreme Court, the seats and funding are created by Congress. Unless the Supreme Court implements an enforceable code of conduct, Congress could simply cut funding to the Supreme Court, or change the number of its members.
William Teach: Like AOC, who says Alito is calling himself a king, but should probably focus on her own ethics violations.
But the emails! That doesn’t address Alito’s claim that he is not accountable.
You undermine your own argument when you point to an article about the House Office of Congressional Ethics and the Congressional Code of Official Conduct.
Reading comprehension issues again, Zach? Checks and balances are not regulation. The SC is an independent branch of government – as Teach stated, if Congress is allowed to regulate SCOTUS, then they are no longer an independent branch of the federal government.
Try to use your brain for something other than to keep your ears from slamming together.
Accountable to who?
How? They are Congressional offices affecting Congress. This says nothing about one branch regulating another.
alanstorm: if Congress is allowed to regulate SCOTUS, then they are no longer an independent branch of the federal government.
Except Congress already regulates the Supreme Court and the Executive branch.
alanstorm: Accountable to who?
To the law. You’re basically arguing that Congress can’t pass a law against the Supreme Court accepting bribes.
alanstorm: They are Congressional offices affecting Congress.
That’s right. Congress has an enforceable code of ethics. The Supreme Court should too.
alanstorm: This says nothing about one branch regulating another.
All branches are mutually regulating. How did you think checks and balances worked?
Fucking commie leftists pissing their pants about total control constantly being just beyond their grasp.
Cry harder, motherfuckers.
Zack:
“To assert that there is no check on the Supreme Court undermines the notion of checks and balances.”
But if Congress can force the SC to do something, what is the check on Congress?
Congress can check the Supremes by passing amendments. Do realize that the Z people are a bunch of high school kids with shit for brains. They are all budding liberal lawyers in a debate club.
James Lewis: But if Congress can force the SC to do something, what is the check on Congress?
Congress can’t force the Supreme Court to do just anything. They can enact anti-corruption measures consistent with the “necessary and proper” clause of the U.S. Constitution. If that is ruled impermissible or simply inadvisable, then the Congress can cut funds to the Supreme Court (other than the Justices’ salaries) or change the number of seats on the Supreme Court.
david7134: Congress can check the Supremes by passing amendments.
Sure, but the Constitution already has some checks and balances built in, as noted.
Dear Zack:
So Congress, under the control of a Leftie Demo party can change the size, issue “necessary and proper” laws….
Like I said, where’s the check on Congress?
James Lewis: Like I said, where’s the check on Congress?
Any new law has to be signed by the Executive (unless there is an override) and is subject to approval by the courts as constitutional, including a law imposing a code of ethics. If the Supreme Court ruled that such a law was unconstitutional, Congress could cut funding (other than the Justices’ salaries) or change the number of seats on the court. There is a balance to be struck between the branches, and the Supreme Court knows it. To avoid further erosion of their credibility, the Court could just decide on a binding code of ethics.
Meanwhile, Alito was given a friendly interview and exposure in a major paper by someone with a case before the Court.
Bwaha! Lolgf