An excellent column, and an accurate summary of the current situation with the Supreme Court.
And sadly it will move the needle exactly ZERO degrees.
I'm not an expert on American History like Heather Cox Richardson, but I'd like to think that people in the past had a bit more respect for the institutions that are the bedrock of America, than do people today. If John Roberts truly cared about the legacy and reputation of the Supreme Court he would have taken the courageous step of demanding either the immediate resignations of Alito and Thomas, or at least their recusal from all applicable cases. But John Roberts isn't interested in the integrity of our judicial system or the reputation of the Supreme Court, rather his objective is to promote and enact whatever he is instructed to by Leonard Leo and The Federalist Society. They may be winning today, but I'm reminded of the line from the last James Bond movie - "history isn't kind to men who play God".
The lifetime appointment thing needs revisiting. I mean with Dementia of all sorts on the rise, we just can't afford to have a doppy Commender in Chief nor should we have crusty old zealots on the bench. If we are handing out lifetime appointments, we should expect them to remain in public service only so long as they remain qualified to do so. Having dementia or any other compounding cognitive issues, should be cause for immediate retirement. When you are a judge, your brain has to be fully functional even if your personality sucks.
Ten years is sufficient to make a positive impact yet short enough for a successor to remedy the shortcomings of erring incumbents. I am looking at two presently sitting members.
What I find interesting about all the discussion about justices recusing themselves is that they view it as such negative. We all hold biased views. That is part of living a long and varied life. However, to be a Judge is to realize this part of you and that you cannot be impartial. That is what comes from wisdom. A virtue we seem to have put on the back burner when we select these justices. A judge who has wisdom and a true depth of their own fallacy will readily recuse themselves and win the respect of their peers and the public.
You raise a good point- why is recusal seen as such a negative? Unfortunately, in Alito and Thomas' situation, I see their refusal to recuse (despite clear evidence of bias) as further evidence of the extent they will go to impose their ideologies onto others. They won't recuse because getting Trump re-elected is more important to them than criticism and disapproval from the left. What's making Trump so important to them is another question; in Thomas' case, he's financially compromised via Harlan Crow; Alito is in cahoots with Leonard Leo, and the whole Federalist Society charade is supported by fossil fuel and NRA money. The oligarchs are using the ideologues to gain political power and in turn cut their own taxes and regulations. Thank you Citizens United.
This is the most clear and comprehensive summation of Sam Alito's irreconcilable bias I have read. Sabrina makes a strong argument, as usual. Facts, logic, and personal experience make for a point well taken.
And these efforts by Sabrina and many other's towards a more just life are, without a doubt, moving the needle. I've had many bad days - bad days where I feel like nothing we do could ever make a meaningful difference. But these are nothing more than my own sense of defeat - nothing more. And I decided at one point that publicly sharing my own defeatedness is entirely counterproductive to everyone and anyone putting effort into our future. It moves the needle - in the wrong direction.
Jon, it's not counterproductive for you to write when you feel defeated. we all feel defeated sometimes; anyone who doesn't isn't paying attention. writing is an act of hope, even if you feel it's negative, it could help lift someone up who's feeling the same. so start your substack already, and I'll cheer you on my friend.
Only someone who has personally been through it all (both the long communion-line reflections on one-sided bigotry and the one-sided bigotry of a Supreme Court Justice) who can write so clearly and particularly, so calmly, about these despicable injustices, the former begging abandonment, the latter, impeachment. Well done, Sabrina, once again.
I don't know if you're the same administrator who sent me a question about one man one vote, and I can't find his original message. So forgive me if you're not. If you are: That would be good topic for a column, but too esoteric for most publications, so unfortunately I can’t devote the amount of time your question deserves. The short answer is, yes, I’m familiar with the Greek argument against full democracy for the reasons you listed. The rise of MAGA presents the perfect illustration of why stupid people shouldn’t be allowed to vote. But restricting the vote according to some objective criterion (like intelligence, wealth, whatever) would concentrate all the power in the hands of the few, and would inevitably lead to an unfettered oligarchy. We’re close to oligarchy, under Citizens United, but we’re not there. Trump has brought us the worst possible combination, where the oligarchs (of fossil fuels, the NRA and big Pharma) have figured out how to electorally manipulate the lowest intellect voters, exposing the fatal flaw in one-man one-vote, but I can’t recommend a better approach.
The perversity of this super-majority court: save the fetus, kill the child with what are essentially machine guns (bump stocks) that can do the job much more efficiently.
An excellent column, and an accurate summary of the current situation with the Supreme Court.
And sadly it will move the needle exactly ZERO degrees.
I'm not an expert on American History like Heather Cox Richardson, but I'd like to think that people in the past had a bit more respect for the institutions that are the bedrock of America, than do people today. If John Roberts truly cared about the legacy and reputation of the Supreme Court he would have taken the courageous step of demanding either the immediate resignations of Alito and Thomas, or at least their recusal from all applicable cases. But John Roberts isn't interested in the integrity of our judicial system or the reputation of the Supreme Court, rather his objective is to promote and enact whatever he is instructed to by Leonard Leo and The Federalist Society. They may be winning today, but I'm reminded of the line from the last James Bond movie - "history isn't kind to men who play God".
The lifetime appointment thing needs revisiting. I mean with Dementia of all sorts on the rise, we just can't afford to have a doppy Commender in Chief nor should we have crusty old zealots on the bench. If we are handing out lifetime appointments, we should expect them to remain in public service only so long as they remain qualified to do so. Having dementia or any other compounding cognitive issues, should be cause for immediate retirement. When you are a judge, your brain has to be fully functional even if your personality sucks.
totally agree. I would think 15 years is sufficient for the high court.
Ten years is sufficient to make a positive impact yet short enough for a successor to remedy the shortcomings of erring incumbents. I am looking at two presently sitting members.
Excellent article. Thanks for the subscription.
and thank you for subscribing!
Dear Sabrina,
Yes, I am the same administrator and I thank you warmly for your well-thought out answer, which coalesces perfectly with my own.
regards,
Jeffrey McCabe
www.creativtrans.com
I admire your thorough referencing and supporting arguments you are such an interesting and diligent writer!!!
Thanks Sabrina. Trying to keep track here ---
Abortion Hell No
Freak Flags Yee-ahh
Machine Guns YES!
All the Bribes We Can Carry Bring It!
What I find interesting about all the discussion about justices recusing themselves is that they view it as such negative. We all hold biased views. That is part of living a long and varied life. However, to be a Judge is to realize this part of you and that you cannot be impartial. That is what comes from wisdom. A virtue we seem to have put on the back burner when we select these justices. A judge who has wisdom and a true depth of their own fallacy will readily recuse themselves and win the respect of their peers and the public.
You raise a good point- why is recusal seen as such a negative? Unfortunately, in Alito and Thomas' situation, I see their refusal to recuse (despite clear evidence of bias) as further evidence of the extent they will go to impose their ideologies onto others. They won't recuse because getting Trump re-elected is more important to them than criticism and disapproval from the left. What's making Trump so important to them is another question; in Thomas' case, he's financially compromised via Harlan Crow; Alito is in cahoots with Leonard Leo, and the whole Federalist Society charade is supported by fossil fuel and NRA money. The oligarchs are using the ideologues to gain political power and in turn cut their own taxes and regulations. Thank you Citizens United.
This is the most clear and comprehensive summation of Sam Alito's irreconcilable bias I have read. Sabrina makes a strong argument, as usual. Facts, logic, and personal experience make for a point well taken.
And these efforts by Sabrina and many other's towards a more just life are, without a doubt, moving the needle. I've had many bad days - bad days where I feel like nothing we do could ever make a meaningful difference. But these are nothing more than my own sense of defeat - nothing more. And I decided at one point that publicly sharing my own defeatedness is entirely counterproductive to everyone and anyone putting effort into our future. It moves the needle - in the wrong direction.
Jon, it's not counterproductive for you to write when you feel defeated. we all feel defeated sometimes; anyone who doesn't isn't paying attention. writing is an act of hope, even if you feel it's negative, it could help lift someone up who's feeling the same. so start your substack already, and I'll cheer you on my friend.
Thank you for the perspective - and the nudge. You're a special person, Sabrina. Glad to have your words in my life.
it's mutual.
Only someone who has personally been through it all (both the long communion-line reflections on one-sided bigotry and the one-sided bigotry of a Supreme Court Justice) who can write so clearly and particularly, so calmly, about these despicable injustices, the former begging abandonment, the latter, impeachment. Well done, Sabrina, once again.
I don't know if you're the same administrator who sent me a question about one man one vote, and I can't find his original message. So forgive me if you're not. If you are: That would be good topic for a column, but too esoteric for most publications, so unfortunately I can’t devote the amount of time your question deserves. The short answer is, yes, I’m familiar with the Greek argument against full democracy for the reasons you listed. The rise of MAGA presents the perfect illustration of why stupid people shouldn’t be allowed to vote. But restricting the vote according to some objective criterion (like intelligence, wealth, whatever) would concentrate all the power in the hands of the few, and would inevitably lead to an unfettered oligarchy. We’re close to oligarchy, under Citizens United, but we’re not there. Trump has brought us the worst possible combination, where the oligarchs (of fossil fuels, the NRA and big Pharma) have figured out how to electorally manipulate the lowest intellect voters, exposing the fatal flaw in one-man one-vote, but I can’t recommend a better approach.
Be well, Sabrina
The perversity of this super-majority court: save the fetus, kill the child with what are essentially machine guns (bump stocks) that can do the job much more efficiently.
What does Sam Alito have in common with JABBA THE HUTT ? See my short post at MeridaGOround.com
Alito is a typical mafioso white supremacist jurist and they are a dime a dozen.
Clarence "Uncle" THOM-ass is an aspiring wannabe.
Fuggedaboutit.
I agree that Alito & Thomas should go, I’m afraid they’re only the tip of the iceberg though! Christian Nationalism has permeated our society!
if we can get rid of those two, it will help balance, the court at least.