• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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.
fskimospy said:
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.
Click to expand...
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:
MrSquished said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?
 
Muse said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
soundforbjt said:
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.
Click to expand...
FTFY
 
soundforbjt said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
HomerJS said:
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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
herm0016 said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Greenman said:
A supreme Court Justice and a Governor communicated.

As headlines go, it lacks punch.
Click to expand...

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.
 
tweaker2 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, here in Georgia, they are currently making a statue of CT to put in the capital.
 
fskimospy said:
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.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Their marriage throws off Benedict Arnold vibes. Woman is a serious Peggy Shippen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top