Of course left wing Justices are taking trips with billionaires....democrats only mention conservative justices...

2aguy

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2014
111,970
52,238
2,290
Saint Ruth, Ruth Bader Ginsberg took trips with a billionaire who actually had business before the court....

For example, in 2018, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg took 14 reimbursed trips — the most of any justice that year — including one in which she was "provided transportation, food and lodging as a tourist and guest of billionaire Israeli businessman Morris Kahn" who "had business before the Supreme Court before" when SCOTUS "handed Kahn’s company Amdocs Limited a win in November 2017 when it declined to take up a patent-related case."

Additionally, "in 2012, Ginsburg traveled to New York to accept Glamour Magazine’s Woman of the Year award, which came with a gift bag valued at $2,500," according to The Washington Post. That is, receiving valuable items is hardly outside the realm of normalcy.
-----

From 2004 to 2018, former Justice Stephen Breyer — another liberal who was nominated by President Bill Clinton — held the record for the most reimbursed trips of any sitting justice at 219, according to OpenSecrets' report.

But, you may say, the issue that makes trips problematic is when they're not reported. Well, you're in luck because liberal Justice Sonio Sotomayor let covered travel expenses go unreported.


A 2020 public records request filed by Fix the Court revealed that Justice Sotomayor did not initially report free air travel and lodging she received to deliver the commencement address at the University of Rhode Island. That included a "$1,045 flight to Rhode Island in 2016...and the block of up to 11 rooms reserved for her, her friends and her security detail at one of the state’s nicest hotels."
------
Despite the fact that liberal justices hold the records for most trips in a given year in recent memory, and the most trips in a 14-year period, and they've failed to disclose reimbursed travel expenses in the past, and have enjoyed trips covered by individuals who've done business before the Supreme Court, it's only conservative justices who face calls to resign. Funny how that works, eh?


Fix the Court subsequently found that Sotomayor's previous "trips to visit universities in Illinois, New Jersey, Alaska, Wisconsin and Minnesota were also omitted" from her disclosures. The Obama nominee subsequently had to amend her disclosures to note the six originally unreported situations.



There was another poster on another thread stating he applauded the leftwing justices for standing up for the conservative justices....and said I was wrong in pointing out that they obviously did the same things the conservative Justices did, and were simply trying to get ahead of the issue when it was finally revealed what they had been doing......he was wrong, I was right...
 
Ginsberg is dead
Lets concentrate on those who are actually on the court

Don’t you think Supreme Court Justices should exercise stricter ethical standards than lower court judges ?


Sotomayor?
 
Saint Ruth, Ruth Bader Ginsberg took trips with a billionaire who actually had business before the court....

For example, in 2018, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg took 14 reimbursed trips — the most of any justice that year — including one in which she was "provided transportation, food and lodging as a tourist and guest of billionaire Israeli businessman Morris Kahn" who "had business before the Supreme Court before" when SCOTUS "handed Kahn’s company Amdocs Limited a win in November 2017 when it declined to take up a patent-related case."

Additionally, "in 2012, Ginsburg traveled to New York to accept Glamour Magazine’s Woman of the Year award, which came with a gift bag valued at $2,500," according to The Washington Post. That is, receiving valuable items is hardly outside the realm of normalcy.
-----

From 2004 to 2018, former Justice Stephen Breyer — another liberal who was nominated by President Bill Clinton — held the record for the most reimbursed trips of any sitting justice at 219, according to OpenSecrets' report.

But, you may say, the issue that makes trips problematic is when they're not reported. Well, you're in luck because liberal Justice Sonio Sotomayor let covered travel expenses go unreported.


A 2020 public records request filed by Fix the Court revealed that Justice Sotomayor did not initially report free air travel and lodging she received to deliver the commencement address at the University of Rhode Island. That included a "$1,045 flight to Rhode Island in 2016...and the block of up to 11 rooms reserved for her, her friends and her security detail at one of the state’s nicest hotels."
------
Despite the fact that liberal justices hold the records for most trips in a given year in recent memory, and the most trips in a 14-year period, and they've failed to disclose reimbursed travel expenses in the past, and have enjoyed trips covered by individuals who've done business before the Supreme Court, it's only conservative justices who face calls to resign. Funny how that works, eh?


Fix the Court subsequently found that Sotomayor's previous "trips to visit universities in Illinois, New Jersey, Alaska, Wisconsin and Minnesota were also omitted" from her disclosures. The Obama nominee subsequently had to amend her disclosures to note the six originally unreported situations.



There was another poster on another thread stating he applauded the leftwing justices for standing up for the conservative justices....and said I was wrong in pointing out that they obviously did the same things the conservative Justices did, and were simply trying to get ahead of the issue when it was finally revealed what they had been doing......he was wrong, I was right...
If they are, hold them ALL responsible. That's not too hard to say for the Left. Apparently the Right would rather defend the corruption.
 
If they are, hold them ALL responsible. That's not too hard to say for the Left. Apparently the Right would rather defend the corruption.


Nope......you guys defend putting kiddie porn in libraries, allowing your justices to go on vacations with people with business before the court, and defending any democrat caught in any scandal........in particular joe biden and his entire family on the payroll of the communist party of China....
 
You don't want SCOTUS Justices help to ethical standards like other judges. Why is that? :eusa_think:

They are held to ethical standards, however since they are the highest court in the land, they have no one else to adjudicate any standards if there are violations. Thus they "police themselves", which isn't the best setup around, but besides creating a court greater than the Supreme Court (which isn't possible without an amendment) there would be no one to judge them.
 
Nope......you guys defend putting kiddie porn in libraries, allowing your justices to go on vacations with people with business before the court, and defending any democrat caught in any scandal........in particular joe biden and his entire family on the payroll of the communist party of China....

Do you support strict ethical standards for SCOTUS?

Come on, you can say it
 
Do you support strict ethical standards for SCOTUS?

Come on, you can say it

Are you saying the court has zero standards, regulations, or rules?

The issue is not of rules, but of "who watches the watchers".

There is no one to hold the President to ethical standards except the legislature via the impeachment process, same as for Justices.
 
Do you support strict ethical standards for SCOTUS?

Come on, you can say it


Yep........they can tighten up what they do....but when the left wing justices are the worst violators of the current standards, yet Thomas is singled out.....I simply say, fuck you, to the left .......
 
They are held to ethical standards, however since they are the highest court in the land, they have no one else to adjudicate any standards if there are violations. Thus they "police themselves", which isn't the best setup around, but besides creating a court greater than the Supreme Court (which isn't possible without an amendment) there would be no one to judge them.
The problem is, they are not held to strict ethical standards

Knowing they have no oversight should result in stronger ethics to remove any doubt over their credibility.
Instead they do not care
 
The problem is, they are not held to strict ethical standards

Knowing they have no oversight should result in stronger ethics to remove any doubt over their credibility.
Instead they do not care

They have oversight. Congress can impeach them if they break the law.
 
Are you saying the court has zero standards, regulations, or rules?

The issue is not of rules, but of "who watches the watchers".

There is no one to hold the President to ethical standards except the legislature via the impeachment process, same as for Justices.
Evidently
 
The SCOTUS should be held to the HIGHEST of ethical standards. Not the lowest.
This tit for tat BS is senseless.
 
Thomas and the Billionaire are friends. It is not like he is going on junkets and getting his cock waxed on these trips (i.e., typical Congressional junkets). There is nothing wrong with this. Further, should Thomas's friend have some litigation that gets before the Court, who's to say that Thomas will not recuse himself as is required? Being that there is a friendship, the cost/value of the trips do not need to be disclosed. This is merely leftist nitpicking in their continued attempt to delegitimize the U.S. Supreme Court.
 
Ginsberg is dead
Lets concentrate on those who are actually on the court

Don’t you think Supreme Court Justices should exercise stricter ethical standards than lower court judges ?
thank you for highlighting it’s been the same practice as before ans is now only an issue because the demafasict want to try to make the court illegitimate so they can impose their demafasict agenda without the judicial branch imposing the rule of law
 
The problem is, they are not held to strict ethical standards

Knowing they have no oversight should result in stronger ethics to remove any doubt over their credibility.
Instead they do not care

They can still be charged with bribery without an ethics structure.
Don't be stupid!
 

Forum List

Back
Top