WTF 5/22/2024

Two ethically compromised and partisan justices have corrupted the Supreme Court… 

The current Supreme Court is ruled by a cadre of over the top conservative justices that have made the court, if not meaningless, a judicial body without any credibility or purpose or in other words… entirely useless.  

Already populated by hypocritics in Justices Samuel Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas it was made worse by the Trump administration’s naming and having confirmed by a politically biased right wing Senate Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

Now after already having done it most severe dirt by fulfilling Trump’s campaign promise to overturn Wade versus Rose it is now threatening, if not already in the process of supporting, to side with violent insurrectionists.

Alito recently released a statement that confirmed that his wife displayed a symbol.. the American flag flown upside down… associated with a failed coup to subvert democracy because she was offended by an anti-Trump sign one of her neighbors displayed. And he doubled down on this confirmation by going on Fox News and telling Fox that the upside-down American flag seen flying outside his home in the days following the January 6 Capitol protests was displayed by his wife in response to insults directed at her from a neighbor. 

Thomas’ wife Ginni is also known to have encouraged and by extension supported coup plotters and Trump’s bullshit claim that his re-election was prevented due to mass electoral fraud.  

Due to these circumstances surrounding both of these two Justices each should have recused themselves multiple times from the various insurrection-related cases before the Court as well as being involved on rendering any decisions involving Trump’s pending immunity case. 

As is now a part of American  history and a matter of record Trump allegedly orchestrated a movement to manipulate the results of the 2020 presidential election, which culminated in the January 6 insurrection.

In August 2023, a grand jury indicted former President Trump on four charges that were brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith that Trump conspired to defraud the United States by using dishonesty, fraud, and deceit to obstruct, and defeat the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified by the federal government; he also conspired obstructed and impeded the January 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified and finally he conspired to overturn the people’s right to vote and to have one’s vote counted in a legally binding general election.

Trump says the charges should all be dismissed based upon his claim that because he was president at the time of the alleged crimes, he is immune from prosecution in the case.

On February 6, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that Special Counsel Jack L. Smith could move forward with a trial.

On Feb. 28, 2024, the Supreme Court granted a stay of that decision, and accepted review of the case, holding oral arguments in the case on April 25.

The original case had been set to begin in early March and with most expert estimates saying the case would have taken up the courts time for a period of about eight to twelve weeks that trial  would most likely be done or wrapping up at this point in time.

 Simply put we the people of the United States should have already had heard, or at the minimum be close to hearing, a verdict in the federal prosecution brought by Smith.

The reason it never came to pass is that a majority on the far right Supreme Court decided to delay the administration of justice by considering Trump’s outrageous presidential immunity argument. And maybe worse is  the fact that Trumps attorneys have presented the argument that under their theory  of presidential power Trump would be immune from prosecution even if he ordered the military to assassinate his political rivals… barring first being impeached and convicted, something that has never happened in American history. 

However…

The court has essentially put the Trump immunity case in what amounts to a deep freeze, making it highly unlikely, if not totally impossible, to try the ex-president before the November election.

Which brings me back to Justice Alito and Thomas and their personal biases due to their spouses activities that supported the January 6 insurrectionists as well as Trump and his obstructionist and conspiratorial antigovernment/democracy tactics.

Each justice should have recused themselves from any decision making involvement that could delay Special Counsel Smith’s prosecution of Trump.

In as plain English as I can put it… Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito should have been recused under any standard of judicial ethics.

Had Alito and Thomas been recused, it would have required the votes of the four other Republican-appointed justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, to take the case.

At a minimum, given Roberts’ repeated statements of concern for the credibility of the court, Roberts needs to come to a full accounting of how and why Alito and Thomas are allowed to continue to sit on the case.

Because without Alito and Thomas involved it then comes down to the remaining justices to render a decisive opinion on the merits of stalling the prosecution of Trump of conspiring to subvert the federal government and the democratic electoral processes of the United States.  

And if Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, plus the three progressives… Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson… come to an agreement over the supposed merits of the case then they could end the stalling and promptly render a decisive opinion that unequivocally declares that Trump’s indictment does not implicate core official conduct justifying presidential immunity and that the Court does not need to decide the extent of immunity for all cases when official conduct is at issue. Rather the Court should look at the alleged facts (where Trump had no constitutional role in compiling electoral votes) and “simply hold that the January 6 case can go forward, without resolving the contours of presidential immunity in future cases.”

According to Supreme Court expert Steve Vladeck concocting some nebulous rule requiring further hearings and/or briefing (begetting another appeal) would open the court up “to charges that, willfully or not, they are necessarily helping Trump.”

Other Supreme court mavens add that if the Court adopts the rule that only core Article II functions are shielded from prosecution, then the procedural pathway on remand is straightforward. The Court would announce that rule and hold that none of the conduct alleged in the indictment falls into the protected category. And then the Court could remand the case to the district court with a green light to proceed to trial.

If that occurs then the prosecution of Trump could start as soon as late summer or early fall, and concluding before the November election.

Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe warns that if Chief Justice Roberts “wants the Court to retain any credibility at all,” he must compel the court to “bite the bullet and issue its decision, regardless of the precise contours of whatever immunity several justices claim to find somewhere in the Constitution.” Tribe further says that “Judge [Tanya S.] Chutkan either can hold whatever hearing the Court thinks necessary to decide exactly which charges against the former president may remain” or can begin the trial itself, which “should have been over by now.”

Again in very plain language… Chief Justice Roberts has no alternative if he wants to dispel the perception that two ethically compromised, partisan justices have thoroughly corrupted the court.

If either Justice refuses to recuse themselves form further decision making involving Trump’s trial and the delay of the trial then impeachment proceedings should be immediately be presented.  

Another thousand words…