Justice Thomas Should Step Down

[Cecilie1200]

He couldn't hear a case in which one litigant was a client of his wife's if he were a small claims' court judge. Should we have lower standards for the Gang Of Nine?

IF that ever happens, and IF he then does not recuse himself, THEN we can talk about it. Until then, you're calling for him to step down based on your assumption of what he would do in a hypothetical situation.

 

[Liability]

He couldn't hear a case in which one litigant was a client of his wife's if he were a small claims' court judge. Should we have lower standards for the Gang Of Nine?

IF that ever happens, and IF he then does not recuse himself, THEN we can talk about it. Until then, you're calling for him to step down based on your assumption of what he would do in a hypothetical situation.

In liberal circles, that's called "being open minded!"

 

[Cecilie1200]

Justice Thomas is married to Virginia Thomas, who this past week announced she is opening a conservative lobbying shop, libertyinc.co. Virginia Thomas, a self-styled "ambassador to the Tea Party" creates a conflict for her husband in cases where she has represented one of the parties, and he should not hear such cases.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/us/politics/05thomas.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=thomas%20wife%20tea%20party&st=cse

But beyond that, his wife's ambition and extremist views make me uncomfy with Thomas hearing any further SCOTUS cases.

Thomas has been a controversial appointment since Day One and has not covered himself in glory since assuming his robes. I say it is time for him to resign altogether.

Thoughts?

So? Because you are uncomfortable with Justice Thomas that means he should step down?

Hmmm, You know what? Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg and her support for abortion rights makes me uncomfortable. I suppose she should step down as well. I am not too fond of Justice Kagan either... she should step down. I know there are plenty out there that don't like Justice Roberts... down he goes. Scalia too! Hell, if this is a popularity contest maybe we should just disband the entire court?

Come on Madeline! That is ridiculous.

Immie

Immie, I'm not suggesting Thomas step down because I dun like his views. I suggest it because I think his wife's political activity puts a cloud on his votes in future.

It is not a popularity contest...it's an ethics question.

I suggest that you just don't like him, and are scrambling for a reason to insist he give up his seat on the bench.

Talk to me when her job actually intersects with his job, rather than when you're just daydreaming about it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And one of them is TO become a lobbyist -- and thankfully -- your permission or approval is not required.

So if our presidents wife started a Soros lobbyist group?

You right wingers would be fully supportive of her doing that?

Seems like I recall some hillary talk from a while back about she should just be a presidents wife and not active in govt?

"Two for the price of one" drove wingnuts absolutely fucking crazy.

There's a big difference between suggesting that she have no job whatsoever, and suggesting that she has no business doing HIS job. Not that I would expect YOU to have the brain wattage to recognize and understand it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

He couldn't hear a case in which one litigant was a client of his wife's if he were a small claims' court judge. Should we have lower standards for the Gang Of Nine?

IF that ever happens, and IF he then does not recuse himself, THEN we can talk about it. Until then, you're calling for him to step down based on your assumption of what he would do in a hypothetical situation.

In liberal circles, that's called "being open minded!"

I call it being so open-minded that one's brain has fallen out.

 

[American Horse]

IF that ever happens, and IF he then does not recuse himself, THEN we can talk about it. Until then, you're calling for him to step down based on your assumption of what he would do in a hypothetical situation.

In liberal circles, that's called "being open minded!"

I call it being so open-minded that one's brain has fallen out.

Yeah, they think they are open minded. They also think they think for themselves; that the other side is comprised of "sheeple;" how sad.

Madeline was very timely with the posting of this topic. She, whether consciously or not, has jumped right in along with a recent upsurge of hatred against Justice Clarence Thomas, with rallies at which there were calls for his “hanging”

Here’s a link to some coverage at the Washington Times' ("Water-Cooler") posting of a video at a rally against the Koch brothers, in which those attending gave their opinions of what should be done to Thomas, Alito, and others on the right.

Liberals at Koch protest: Hang Justice Thomas - Washington Times

 

[Granny]

Ruth Bader Ginsberg should step down as a Supreme Court Justice. Her membership in the ACLU is just too extremist.

Kagan and Sotomayor should also step down. Their extremist views...

You've sure got that nailed down good. On top of Ginsberg's long-standing relationship with the ACLU (I believe she was pretty high up in the chain in her time with ACLU), Sotomayor is a member of La Raza. Kagan, in terms of competence and experience, is totally unfit to be on the Supreme Court.

 

[midcan5]

Anyone ever watch some of the cases on cspan? Thomas says nothing, it is as if he suffers from fear of 'foot in the mouth syndrome?' The man is a blind ideologue and a robot could replace him, you know where he is on every case. But his wife has to be a bit loony as the call to Anita Hill demonstrated. Given her position in lobbying how would anyone expect anything but corporate activism from this judge. Scalia and Alito are activist corporate tools as well. Whenever anyone says it makes no difference who gets elected, you only have to look at the ideologues the republicans select, to know it can make a big difference. Thomas should have recused himself from the 'Citizens United' case, but ideologues are blind enough not to see what justice even means.

This is excellent if you have time. Democracy after Citizens United | MIT World


"Personally, I question whether any of these approaches will work. The CU ruling established control over all three branches of government. The president and members of congress now know that they cannot be reelected without the financial support of corporations and special interest groups."
Citizens United - One year later - Steven Rockford - Open Salon

 

[Cecilie1200]

Anyone ever watch some of the cases on cspan? Thomas says nothing, it is as if he suffers from fear of 'foot in the mouth syndrome?' The man is a blind ideologue and a robot could replace him, you know where he is on every case. But his wife has to be a bit loony as the call to Anita Hill demonstrated. Given her position in lobbying how would anyone expect anything but corporate activism from this judge. Scalia and Alito are activist corporate tools as well. Whenever anyone says it makes no difference who gets elected, you only have to look at the ideologues the republicans select, to know it can make a big difference. Thomas should have recused himself from the 'Citizens United' case, but ideologues are blind enough not to see what justice even means.

This is excellent if you have time. Democracy after Citizens United | MIT World


"Personally, I question whether any of these approaches will work. The CU ruling established control over all three branches of government. The president and members of congress now know that they cannot be reelected without the financial support of corporations and special interest groups."
Citizens United - One year later - Steven Rockford - Open Salon

Given what I've seen of Democrat and liberal leaders on the news, I realize that it would be tough for anyone on the leftist side to understand that wisdom is not demonstrated by running your gums incessantly whether or not you have anything worthwhile to say.

Personally, I find the idea of someone who is quiet and thoughtful and listens instead of constantly yapping to be rather refreshing.

 

[rikules]

Judge Thomas has been a very good Associate Justice, and his wife's political views, words and actions have no bearing on his own views, words, actions and decisions.

The OP states not one coherent reason why Justice Thomas should step down.

Indeed, there is no good ground relating to his wife that should make him even give consideration to such a liberally wishful bit of thinking.

the exact OPPOSITE of what you would say/believe if this was a LIBERAL judge with a wife becoming involved with a LIBERAL PAC/organization

 

[Liability]

Judge Thomas has been a very good Associate Justice, and his wife's political views, words and actions have no bearing on his own views, words, actions and decisions.

The OP states not one coherent reason why Justice Thomas should step down.

Indeed, there is no good ground relating to his wife that should make him even give consideration to such a liberally wishful bit of thinking.

the exact OPPOSITE of what you would say/believe if this was a LIBERAL judge with a wife becoming involved with a LIBERAL PAC/organization

Wrong. I would not take the opposite position at all. I would espouse the exact same position. Indeed, my position would be perfectly consistent, ridikules.

Either a wife has a right to her own views and beliefs and the right to express them, or she doesn't.

Being married to a SCOTUS Associate Justice does not terminate anybody's First Amendment rights.

I am amazed that so many slow-witted tools like you cannot grasp that crystal clear and obvious fact.

 

[Synthaholic]

Judge Thomas has been a very good Associate Justice, and his wife's political views, words and actions have no bearing on his own views, words, actions and decisions.

The OP states not one coherent reason why Justice Thomas should step down.

Indeed, there is no good ground relating to his wife that should make him even give consideration to such a liberally wishful bit of thinking.

the exact OPPOSITE of what you would say/believe if this was a LIBERAL judge with a wife becoming involved with a LIBERAL PAC/organization

Wrong. I would not take the opposite position at all. I would espouse the exact same position. Indeed, my position would be perfectly consistent, ridikules.

Either a wife has a right to her own views and beliefs and the right to express them, or she doesn't.

Being married to a SCOTUS Associate Justice does not terminate anybody's First Amendment rights.

I am amazed that so many slow-witted tools like you cannot grasp that crystal clear and obvious fact.

Two for the price of one!

 

[Liability]

the exact OPPOSITE of what you would say/believe if this was a LIBERAL judge with a wife becoming involved with a LIBERAL PAC/organization

Wrong. I would not take the opposite position at all. I would espouse the exact same position. Indeed, my position would be perfectly consistent, ridikules.

Either a wife has a right to her own views and beliefs and the right to express them, or she doesn't.

Being married to a SCOTUS Associate Justice does not terminate anybody's First Amendment rights.

I am amazed that so many slow-witted tools like you cannot grasp that crystal clear and obvious fact.

Two for the price of one!

^ Looks like a Simpleholic admission that he is a slow witted tool like ridikules.

Good.

It's a start.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Justice Thomas is married to Virginia Thomas, who this past week announced she is opening a conservative lobbying shop, libertyinc.co. Virginia Thomas, a self-styled "ambassador to the Tea Party" creates a conflict for her husband in cases where she has represented one of the parties, and he should not hear such cases.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/us/politics/05thomas.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=thomas%20wife%20tea%20party&st=cse

But beyond that, his wife's ambition and extremist views make me uncomfy with Thomas hearing any further SCOTUS cases.

Thomas has been a controversial appointment since Day One and has not covered himself in glory since assuming his robes. I say it is time for him to resign altogether.

Thoughts?

Utter nonsense....His wife can be involved with what she wants, and the controversy was nothing more than slander, as is to be expected from some. The Tea Party is not radical get a grip.

Eek the radicals are coming....

 

[Synthaholic]

Wrong. I would not take the opposite position at all. I would espouse the exact same position. Indeed, my position would be perfectly consistent, ridikules.

Either a wife has a right to her own views and beliefs and the right to express them, or she doesn't.

Being married to a SCOTUS Associate Justice does not terminate anybody's First Amendment rights.

I am amazed that so many slow-witted tools like you cannot grasp that crystal clear and obvious fact.

Two for the price of one!

^ Looks like a Simpleholic admission that he is a slow witted tool like ridikules.

Good.

It's a start.

How do we know if he is being influenced by her teabagging? And all the big bucks she's pulling in?

I guess we'll know by the decisions he makes and the votes he takes.

 

[Liability]

Two for the price of one!

^ Looks like a Simpleholic admission that he is a slow witted tool like ridikules.

Good.

It's a start.

How do we know if he is being influenced by her teabagging? And all the big bucks she's pulling in?

I guess we'll know by the decisions he makes and the votes he takes.

Idiot that Simpleholic is, he can't even see what a fool he just made of himself.

"How do we know?"

Moron, "how do we know" that Soros isn't finger fucking Kagan under her robes to influence her votes?

Damn, but Simpleholic is one stupid tool.

To whatever extent Justice Thomas' wife's Tea Party views concern you, you idiot, it is highly probable that a conservative jurist like Justice Thomas has already been "influenced" -- in the same general direction -- by his own political philosophy. It's not like he doesn't have a track record already, you nimrod. So if he votes in a case along conservative lines, you will not know if he has spoken with his wife about it at all.

Too bad for you.

 

[Synthaholic]

^ Looks like a Simpleholic admission that he is a slow witted tool like ridikules.

Good.

It's a start.

How do we know if he is being influenced by her teabagging? And all the big bucks she's pulling in?

I guess we'll know by the decisions he makes and the votes he takes.

Idiot that Simpleholic is, he can't even see what a fool he just made of himself.

"How do we know?"

Moron, "how do we know" that Soros isn't finger fucking Kagan under her robes to influence her votes?

Damn, but Simpleholic is one stupid tool.

To whatever extent Justice Thomas' wife's Tea Party views concern you, you idiot, it is highly probable that a conservative jurist like Justice Thomas has already been "influenced" -- in the same general direction -- by his own political philosophy. It's not like he doesn't have a track record already, you nimrod. So if he votes in a case along conservative lines, you will not know if he has spoken with his wife about it at all.

Too bad for you.

So, you're saying he's going to vote wingnut anyway, so her activities do not matter?

 

[Liability]

How do we know if he is being influenced by her teabagging? And all the big bucks she's pulling in?

I guess we'll know by the decisions he makes and the votes he takes.

Idiot that Simpleholic is, he can't even see what a fool he just made of himself.

"How do we know?"

Moron, "how do we know" that Soros isn't finger fucking Kagan under her robes to influence her votes?

Damn, but Simpleholic is one stupid tool.

To whatever extent Justice Thomas' wife's Tea Party views concern you, you idiot, it is highly probable that a conservative jurist like Justice Thomas has already been "influenced" -- in the same general direction -- by his own political philosophy. It's not like he doesn't have a track record already, you nimrod. So if he votes in a case along conservative lines, you will not know if he has spoken with his wife about it at all.

Too bad for you.

So, you're saying he's going to vote wingnut anyway, so her activities do not matter?

No. I'm saying that he is a conservative and thus will not vote wingnut. Wingnuts like the uber-libz presently infesting the bench "vote wingnut."

Honest, dedicated, rational, reasonable, fair and logical jurists, like Justice Thomas, tend to vote according to what the law and the Constitution actually say.

Ergo, it obviously doesn't matter what his wife believes or doesn't believe. He will vote in the manner we've come to expect. Logical, balanced, reasonable, conservative, supportive of the precepts of our Constitutionally limited government and fair.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Idiot that Simpleholic is, he can't even see what a fool he just made of himself.

"How do we know?"

Moron, "how do we know" that Soros isn't finger fucking Kagan under her robes to influence her votes?

Damn, but Simpleholic is one stupid tool.

To whatever extent Justice Thomas' wife's Tea Party views concern you, you idiot, it is highly probable that a conservative jurist like Justice Thomas has already been "influenced" -- in the same general direction -- by his own political philosophy. It's not like he doesn't have a track record already, you nimrod. So if he votes in a case along conservative lines, you will not know if he has spoken with his wife about it at all.

Too bad for you.

So, you're saying he's going to vote wingnut anyway, so her activities do not matter?

No. I'm saying that he is a conservative and thus will not vote wingnut. Wingnuts like the uber-libz presently infesting the bench "vote wingnut."

Honest, dedicated, rational, reasonable, fair and logical jurists, like Justice Thomas, tend to vote according to what the law and the Constitution actually say.

Ergo, it obviously doesn't matte what his wife believes or doesn't believe. He will vote in the manner we've come to expect. Logical, balanced, reasonable, conservative, supportive of the precepts of our Constitutionally limited government and fair.

Yes, he will...

 

[driveby]

All the left wing racists want Thomas to step down, shocker.....