1. Intro to the Structure of Lies in Conservative Jurisprudence →

    Scalia wasn’t just being hypocritical. He was, quite blatantly, lying. If he actually believed what he claimed to believe in Windsor, then he never would have joined the decision to strike down the Voting Rights Act in Holder. To the contrary, he would have denounced John Roberts’ opinion with venomous glee. To absolutely no one’s surprise, he did not. Because everybody knows he was lying in his Windsor dissent. Everybody knows he’s been lying for decades.

    The whole five part series is worth a read. The conservative movement is basically founded on this kind of BS.

  2. Borowitz Report:Supreme Court Frees Americans from Burden of Voting →

    Justice Scalia added that the Voting Rights Act had “thrust upon the shoulders of millions of Americans the terrible and unwanted burden of exercising their rights in a democracy.”

  3. Supreme Court or Wu Tang Clan? →

    Both crews have nine members, both have elaborate nicknames and aliases, and both have, at some point, had an “ol’ dirty bastard” amongst their members (we’re looking at you, Alito)

    Too funny not to share.

  4. At what point with the talking heads on FOX start calling Justice Roberts a liberal?

  5. I love how the SCOTUS upholding an idea that came from the Heritage Foundation is now proof that we are heading toward socialism. Private, for profit insurance plus private, for profit hospitals plus private, for profit doctors equals socialism?

  6. Justice Kennedy is the 3rd branch of government

    Can we end this charade that the SCOTUS is deciding the constitutionality of the Obama-Care mandate and admit that Justice Kennedy is, for the time being; the 3rd branch of government?

  7. Scalia and Thomas dine with healthcare law challengers as court takes case →

    This is what cronyism looks like.

  8. Friendship of Justice and Magnate Puts Focus on Ethics

    That friendship is important to determining whether Justice Thomas’s interactions with Mr. Crow conflict with the code, said Raymond J. McKoski, a retired state judge in Illinois who wrote a law review article on charitable fund-raising by judges. If Justice Thomas did not “misuse the prestige of office” in getting Mr. Crow to take on the project, it should not be a concern, he said.

    “Some of it depends on the conversations that took place,” Mr. McKoski said. “Who brought up the idea? How willing was Mr. Crow to do it? What exact questions were asked by Justice Thomas?”


    From NYTimes.com

    It is to early to ask what did he know and when did he know it. Plus I doubt he would take any criticism as anything other that liberal partisanship. But this is really creepy and there should be in investigation.

  9. Justice Clarence Thomas Should Resign For His Egregious Conflicts of Interest and Unethical Behavior

    Leading conservative donor Harlan Crow, whose company often litigates in federal court, donated $500,000 to allow Thomas’s wife to start a Tea Party group and he once gave Thomas a $19,000 Bible that belonged to Frederick Douglass. The American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank which frequently files briefs in Thomas’ Court, also gave Thomas a $15,000 gift.If this sounds familiar, it’s because America has seen this movie before. Indeed, the Thomas scandal is little more than a remake of the forty year-old gifting scandal that brought down Justice Abe Fortas. Like Thomas, Fortas liked to associate with wealthy individuals with potential business before his Court. And like Thomas, Fortas took inappropriate gifts from his wealthy benefactors.

    […]One of Thomas’ benefactors has even filed briefs in his Court since giving Thomas a $15,000 gift, and Thomas has not recused himself from each of these cases.


    From Justice Clarence Thomas Should Resign For His Egregious Conflicts of Interest and Unethical Behavior

    Why should he resign, it isn’t like he is a Democrat or something.

  10. Activism of Thomas’s Wife Could Raise Judicial Issues

    It is the most partisan role ever for a spouse of a justice on the nation’s highest court, and Mrs. Thomas is just getting started. “Liberty Central will be bigger than the Tea Party movement,” she told Fox News in April, at a Tea Party rally in Atlanta.

    But to some people who study judicial ethics, Mrs. Thomas’s activism is raising knotty questions, in particular about her acceptance of large, unidentified contributions for Liberty Central.

    From Activism of Thomas’s Wife Could Raise Judicial Issues - NYTimes.com

    What would the right say if a Liberal judge’s spouse took money from some undisclosed donor for a blatantly political purpose?