Theres a rumor going around Clarence Thomas had communications with Desantis.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,382
7,446
136
How about expanding the pool to a large number and then 9 are randomly chosen (similar to a jury) when it's time to hear a case.

Some cases would massively favor Republican / Democrat just based on random chance?
Not sure that makes a lot of sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HurleyBird

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
37,404
8,039
136
The only discipline for SCOTUS justices is impeachment, they aren't subject to the normal judicial code of ethics. Also I'm not sure it's a good idea to try and remove public officials based on the actions of their spouse. It's supposed to be HIS misconduct, not his wife's.
It seems to me his refusal to recuse himself from deliberations concerning Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at this point what with the recent revelations concerning his wife's obsession and efforts to incite insurrection would be grounds for impeachment.
 
Last edited:

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
37,404
8,039
136
It's also high time people start realizing a document created 250 years ago by a bunch of pretty backwards men by today's standards in a world much much smaller and with far different populations is just not working that well anymore, and to stop saying we need to worship it.

It's insane.
Yes, but you need a constitution, right? What's insane is thinking that the one we have is adequate and not at least in need of an overhaul if not a virtual replacement. Just how do we go about doing that?
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,785
6,032
136
Yes, but you need a constitution, right? What's insane is thinking that the one we have is adequate and not at least in need of an overhaul if not a virtual replacement. Just how do we go about doing that?
Don’t you realize that the ‘Greatest Country’ can’t do anything other first World countries do like draft a new Constitution or implement a national healthcare plan, etc. It can’t be done...here, anywhere else, no problem. We’re just that special.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
37,404
8,039
136
Don’t you realize that the ‘Greatest Country’ can’t do anything other first World countries do like draft a new Constitution or implement a national healthcare plan, etc. It can’t be done...here, anywhere else, no problem. We’re just that special fucked up.
FTFY
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,382
7,446
136
Don’t you realize that the ‘Greatest Country’ can’t do anything other first World countries do like draft a new Constitution or implement a national healthcare plan, etc. It can’t be done...here, anywhere else, no problem. We’re just that special.

Our nation is flawed in that the winner of elections will almost always lack the power to enact meaningful change.
So our pot boils. The feeling that we need direct action in violation of a stagnant law becomes a more pressing charge.
Ours breeds revolution in one form or another. For if elections cannot do it, then what will? The pen or the gun? Thus far, our answer is clear. And deeply distressing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

herm0016

Diamond Member
Feb 26, 2005
8,385
1,011
126
How about expanding the pool to a large number and then 9 are randomly chosen (similar to a jury) when it's time to hear a case. Let's say a pool of 24-30 with 18 year terms. Equal numbers chosen by Republicans and Democrats. If a Republican retires or dies that spot is vacant until a Republican can fill it. There are still enough to chose for hearing cases.
Also, justices should not choose the cases to hear. There needs to be an objective group of people who won't decide outcome.

The court in it's current configuration has proven it can't be trusted.

this is not a bad idea. interesting. though, i think we need to end the duopoly itself also. so can we expand to some other way than just saying dems and reps get all the choices?
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
25,992
23,793
136
this is not a bad idea. interesting. though, i think we need to end the duopoly itself also. so can we expand to some other way than just saying dems and reps get all the choices?
Just need to build a party that can take influence from the other two. It’s happened several times in American history. Or radically overhaul our governmental structure which is going to be harder than building a new party.
 
Feb 4, 2009
34,506
15,737
136
A supreme Court Justice and a Governor communicated.

As headlines go, it lacks punch.

While I mostly agree with this sentiment, I am compelled to say two things.
1st Remember when a former President (Bill Clinton) spoke with an AG in a plane during an election?
2nd Ginny Thomas is far to involved in stuff that makes it to the court. No other Judge in the land could have this and still hear cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaaQ and uclaLabrat

alien42

Lifer
Nov 28, 2004
12,627
3,014
136
I never wanted to accuse Clarence of being the nation's highest example of an Uncle Tom kind of guy, but he sure is testing the limits of which he deserves that description. He's overcompensating in order to fit in. Not a good look on his part.

Meanwhile, here in Georgia, they are currently making a statue of CT to put in the capital.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: hal2kilo and DaaQ

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,286
19,944
146
The only discipline for SCOTUS justices is impeachment, they aren't subject to the normal judicial code of ethics. Also I'm not sure it's a good idea to try and remove public officials based on the actions of their spouse. It's supposed to be HIS misconduct, not his wife's.
Agreed.

Their marriage throws off Benedict Arnold vibes. Woman is a serious Peggy Shippen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo