Federal courts decline to refer SC Justice Clarence Thomas to attorney general over ethics

None of those were anti-black memes and you know it.

Didn't say they were, did I? No, they were anti the black Justice
He]s just bought and paid by GOP supporters. I don't care what color he is. No other person in high government position could get away with being on the take.
What you are describing is called bribery and in case you missed it, very illegal, particularly by people "in high government position" Ask Alcee Hastings.

Your cult didn't impeach him becasue they knew the allegations were all bullshit.
 
OP says:
"It’s unclear whether the law allows the U.S. Judicial Conference to make a criminal referral regarding a Supreme Court justice, U.S. District Judge Robert Conrad wrote. He serves as secretary for the conference, which sets policy for the federal court system and is led by Chief Justice John Roberts.

A referral in this case isn’t necessary, Conrad said, because two Democratic senators called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel over the summer. No such appointment has been publicly made."

They didn't make a referral for the reasons they said. A referral had already been made, and the AG didn't pursue it.

Much ado about nothing...
 
Didn't say they were, did I? No, they were anti the black Justice

What you are describing is called bribery and in case you missed it, very illegal, particularly by people "in high government position" Ask Alcee Hastings.

Your cult didn't impeach him becasue they knew the allegations were all bullshit.
BS. He was not impeached, as your sided does not impeach people on their side, even if guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. They certainly weren't going to impeach him, so Biden could appoint someone to the Supreme Court.
 
BS. He was not impeached, as your sided does not impeach people on their side, even if guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. They certainly weren't going to impeach him, so Biden could appoint someone to the Supreme Court.
These bullshit allegations have been around for more than a decade. Your cult wasn't shy about impeaching Trump - twice. They didn't impeach him becasue the allegations are bullshit solely aimed at firing up cultists such as yourself with propaganda.
 
These bullshit allegations have been around for more than a decade. Your cult wasn't shy about impeaching Trump - twice. They didn't impeach him becasue the allegations are bullshit solely aimed at firing up cultists such as yourself with propaganda.
It's not like he broke ethic rules while on the bench. They had none until this summer, and those allow anything, with no punishment or expulsion. Totally useless.
 
It's not like he broke ethic rules while on the bench. They had none until this summer, and those allow anything, with no punishment or expulsion. Totally useless.
The bullshit you posted in you memes are bribery - A FELONY CRIME under federal law. For the fourth and last time, your cult didn't didn't do shit about it, e.g. impeachment, becasue the shit they've fed you is just that - bullshit - to get you cultists angry at the black judge.
 
The bullshit you posted in you memes are bribery - A FELONY CRIME under federal law. For the fourth and last time, your cult didn't didn't do shit about it, e.g. impeachment, becasue the shit they've fed you is just that - bullshit - to get you cultists angry at the black judge.
And you thought it would be carried out in a republican house.:auiqs.jpg:
Damn, you're dumb.
 
And you thought it would be carried out in a republican house.:auiqs.jpg:
Dude. third time, was it a Republican House that impeached Trump? Twice? Your cult has had a decade to impeach Uncle Clarence. You need to ask you cult leaders why they haven't
Damn, you're dumb.
Back atcha poppyhead
 
Dude. third time, was it a Republican House that impeached Trump? Twice? Your cult has had a decade to impeach Uncle Clarence. You need to ask you cult leaders why they haven't

Back atcha poppyhead
Now you know, why I am an Independent, as niether of the two corrupt parties, answer to me, or are worth believing in.
 
The Trump hating cult. You're a charter member.
Get a grip. I wish him the best on his stated mission to bring the country together, whether they voted for him or not. I take it you skipped that speech?
 
The Supreme Court's own resident pimp-daddy gets to skate free and those so-called "ethics violations" are apparently going to be dropped.

Federal courts won’t refer Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to attorney general over ethics​



WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal courts will not refer allegations that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas may have violated ethics laws to the Justice Department, the judiciary’s policymaking body said Thursday.

Thomas has agreed to follow updated requirements on reporting trips and gifts, including clearer guidelines on hospitality from friends, the U.S. Judicial Conference wrote to Democratic senators who had called for an investigation into undisclosed acceptance of luxury trips.

Thomas has previously said he wasn’t required to disclose the many trips he and his wife took that were paid for by wealthy benefactors like Republican megadonor Harlan Crow because they are close personal friends. The court didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.

The Supreme Court adopted its first code of ethics in 2023 in the face of sustained criticism, though the new code still lacks a means of enforcement.

It’s unclear whether the law allows the U.S. Judicial Conference to make a criminal referral regarding a Supreme Court justice, U.S. District Judge Robert Conrad wrote. He serves as secretary for the conference, which sets policy for the federal court system and is led by Chief Justice John Roberts.

A referral in this case isn’t necessary, Conrad said, because two Democratic senators called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel over the summer. No such appointment has been publicly made.

The group Fix the Court said the financial disclosure law is clear and should apply to justices. “The Conference’s letters further underscore the need for Congress to create a new and transparent mechanism to investigate the justices for ethics violations since the Conference is unwilling to act upon the one method we had presumed existed to do that,” Executive Director Gabe Roth said in a statement.

Conrad also sent a similar response to a separate complaint from a conservative legal group, the Center for Renewing America, in regard to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s reports on the source of her husband’s consulting income. Jackson has since amended her disclosures and also agreed to updated reporting requirements, Conrad wrote."

Federal courts won't refer Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to attorney general over ethics - SRN News
Maybe They fear if they applied the standards to others they will soon be applied to them?

Or possibly their payments were made on time?
 
15th post
The Supreme Court's own resident pimp-daddy gets to skate free and those so-called "ethics violations" are apparently going to be dropped.

Federal courts won’t refer Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to attorney general over ethics​



WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal courts will not refer allegations that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas may have violated ethics laws to the Justice Department, the judiciary’s policymaking body said Thursday.

Thomas has agreed to follow updated requirements on reporting trips and gifts, including clearer guidelines on hospitality from friends, the U.S. Judicial Conference wrote to Democratic senators who had called for an investigation into undisclosed acceptance of luxury trips.

Thomas has previously said he wasn’t required to disclose the many trips he and his wife took that were paid for by wealthy benefactors like Republican megadonor Harlan Crow because they are close personal friends. The court didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.

The Supreme Court adopted its first code of ethics in 2023 in the face of sustained criticism, though the new code still lacks a means of enforcement.

It’s unclear whether the law allows the U.S. Judicial Conference to make a criminal referral regarding a Supreme Court justice, U.S. District Judge Robert Conrad wrote. He serves as secretary for the conference, which sets policy for the federal court system and is led by Chief Justice John Roberts.

A referral in this case isn’t necessary, Conrad said, because two Democratic senators called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel over the summer. No such appointment has been publicly made.

The group Fix the Court said the financial disclosure law is clear and should apply to justices. “The Conference’s letters further underscore the need for Congress to create a new and transparent mechanism to investigate the justices for ethics violations since the Conference is unwilling to act upon the one method we had presumed existed to do that,” Executive Director Gabe Roth said in a statement.

Conrad also sent a similar response to a separate complaint from a conservative legal group, the Center for Renewing America, in regard to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s reports on the source of her husband’s consulting income. Jackson has since amended her disclosures and also agreed to updated reporting requirements, Conrad wrote."

Federal courts won't refer Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to attorney general over ethics - SRN News
yup-thats-him-v0-yk591e3re1be1.jpeg
 
Back
Top Bottom