And about that controversy:One of the goals of Trump's various allies was to try to get the election settled by the Supreme Court, which Trump has been vocal about. https://t.co/CdGeSt2Em4
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) March 24, 2022
But if Congress tries to impose and, more importantly enforce, a code of ethics, that would endanger the independence of the judiciary. Or do the judiciary would insist, and then declare the law unconstitutional. Which, yes, would set up a constitutional crisis. The only oversight allowed is impeachment, and that’s just because it’s already baked into the pie.Wouldn't this be a nice time for United States Supreme Court justices to be bound by a code of ethics?
— NOHat (@Popehat) March 24, 2022
Of course it's also a time to remember that "during good behavior" means whatever Congress decides it does.
It’s just a symptom of insanity. Seriously. Completely off the planet.This is a real text that Ginni Thomas sent to Mark Meadows, shortly after the 2020 election. pic.twitter.com/JHooG5DyZI
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) March 24, 2022
And there’s the other problem:The wife of a sitting Supreme Court justice told Trump’s chief of staff that Biden and his family would face military tribunals at Guantanamo for “ballot fraud.” https://t.co/Nyf2q1T9mo pic.twitter.com/G0OUzxvFAz
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) March 24, 2022
However, opinions differ:I am just making it clear that THESE texts.. between Ginni Thomas and Mark Meadows are likely not part of the documents that Justice Thomas ruled should not be released to the committee. (6)
— Ryan Nobles (@ryanobles) March 24, 2022
-end-
Which brings back to who watches the watchers? Or more accurately, who watches the unwatchable? Impeachment is the bluntest of blunt instruments. It will never support even an investigation, much less a removal.So, @TheNewYorker reported, instead of recusing, Clarence Thomas was the only vote to block the Jan6 committee from getting Trump's papers. Mark Meadows filed a supporting brief. And Ginni's texts to Meadows were at stake. https://t.co/2oj1rX3DnC via @NewYorker
— Jane Mayer (@JaneMayerNYer) March 24, 2022
Whatever it is, there’s bugger all we can do about it.The wife of a Supreme Court justice appears to have beliefs indistinguishable from a QAnon follower. This is very, very bad. pic.twitter.com/J4g35jTktc
— The Republican Accountability Project (@AccountableGOP) March 25, 2022
Yes, we’ll always have that. And Paris. We’ll always have Paris, too.Remember the time Ginni Thomas left a nasty message on Anita Hill's phone demanding an apology. That was wild.
— Jeet Heer (@HeerJeet) March 24, 2022
Impeachment's for the little people. For presidents it's a myth, for Supremes it's also a myth. Especially for Republican-fascists holding those offices. I hate an elected judiciary in practice but I'd love it if Supreme Court appointments became critical issues in Senate campaigns in a big way.
ReplyDelete