Sen. Whitehouse: Supreme Court justices’ behavior is starting to ‘alarm’ other judges

[@deerobins9086]

This must be addressed. Can corruption really go this far without any recompence.

[@tallymay7407]

What corruption? What are you talking about?

[@ReformedRepublican]

Yes. Which is tragic.

[@picholoup]

​@@tallymay7407 posing stupid questions after not listening makes you look... dumb or willfully ignorant. Lame trolling! Work at least a little bit to earn your rubels.

[@SA12String]

I have the feeling that the reason the justices believe that they are immune is because many of them, for a very long time, have been getting away with it. Perhaps for 50, 60 or 100 years. They clearly believe that these things are perks of being a SCOTUS justice. Yes, it sounds like they literally believe that corruption is a right when you're appointed to the Supreme Court. It has to be stopped, and it has to be prosecuted, and here we are with a Congress who will never impeach one of them, because of partisan politics, which is patently obscene.

[@canttakejokesthenleaveoffi1808]

Everyone has something to hide. But a few who don’t usually die

[@newmove4378]

If the supreme court is separate but equal and they refuse to abide by norms, processes and the law then they clearly are not equal. They have dug their own grave.

[@zackwoodd4606]

They act well within their power. Don't accuse them of not abiding by the law when they absolutely do. And they make sure the current fuhrer acts within his executive power

[@newmove4378]

@@zackwoodd4606 Who is this current fuhrer?

[@zackwoodd4606]

@@newmove4378 Biden. He acts more like a fuhrer than a president because he keeps trying to overstep his executive power and the supreme court has to keep stopping him

[@RM-gm9fs]

​@@zackwoodd4606You know this how?

[@zackwoodd4606]

@R M if you paid attention to his administration at all you would know

[@batgurrl]

Senator Whitehouse is one of best at articulating an idea clearly. Always great to see Lawrence interview him.

[@tallymay7407]

You mean the senator who belongs to a whites only club house in RI! That's who you are praising! Bahaaahaaa

[@suemccord2633]

Love seeing them together. Honorable People ❤

[@williamlouie569]

Chief Justice said they self police their own behaviors. How is that working out!

[@donnabrockbank8296]

It has until now. Trump changed the rules.

[@Wasted_Talent007]

The court has lost the respect, deference, and admiration of the American public. They will not gain it back in your lifetime. This is how much irreparable damage that Thomas has done. If his peers do not step up soon; the entire justice system will suffer the same general perception. To save their institution, other justices at all levels of the judiciary must step forward and restore public confidence in their institution. Otherwise, they will be collectively perceived similarly to Thomas.

[@jeffdurant7636]

Weird, This is my favorite supreme court of all time and certainly has my admiration and many other people I know.

[@Wasted_Talent007]

@@jeffdurant7636 That is because you take pride in admiring corruption. You are not convincing ethical people of anything here. You are just revealing the direction of your moral compass. It is relatively easy to present a convincing argument against people like you. It is because you do all of the heavy lifting for me. You are a great ambassador for your authoritarian cause. Don't change a thing. Keep on doing exactly what you are doing.

[@jeffdurant7636]

@@Wasted_Talent007 Nah just sick of pssy crybaby liberals who know nothing about what the separation of powers actually are. This supreme court is consistently stripping power away from people who shouldn't have it (unelected officials). Consistently handing power back to the legislature (as they should), and overturning bad case law (such as roe v wade). 99% of what you're upset about is the power that resides in congress. The president appoint some special branch of unelected officials to make law that since congress can't pass on laws on their own. That is unconstitutional. The Supreme court is putting a stop to that nonsense, and good on em. You want a weapons ban, do it through a congressional act, like its supposed to be done. You want abortion rights, pass it through congress like it's supposed to be done.

[@davidherz9968]

@@jeffdurant7636 yes, very weird indeed...

[@rod1514]

Hogwash! This is just more leftist propaganda from the biggest joke of a “ news” network on the planet.

[@ramonareinhold8424]

Any judge who covers for Thomas, has something to hide

[@ohreally8929]

When I was in school I believed that America stood for things like liberty and justice for all. Now all our kids can be expected to believe is that it stands for wanton greed and very little else.

[@arcdecibel9986]

And what school taught you its version of liberty and justice?

[@rjlchristie]

And war mongering, don't forget the war mongering.

[@marieblair4781]

@@arcdecibel9986 there was a time, probably back before your day, @Arc Decibel, when we recited the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America in school every morning. ….with liberty and justice for all. Now, MAGA republicans pledge allegiance to Donald tRump. Sad

[@jamesricker3997]

A lot of that has to do with the John Roberts court ruling in favor of greed and corruption at every opportunity

[@arcdecibel9986]

@@marieblair4781 No, I was around back then, and no matter what the pledge of allegiance said, what mattered is what it symbolized. For us, as students in middle-class America, with good parents, good fun, a good economy, and good homes, it symbolized a pledge to a good life. Not perfect, we had to invent our own toys, and our parents were always annoying, but we had freedom. For you, it obviously symbolizes something else. What hurt you so badly that you think a society like that has to be changed? Why do you not aspire to it?

[@mr.sharpie2206]

Separation of powers also comes with checks and balances. No one branch is above the other in that system and all are accountable to the others in that system as well.

[@JelMain]

And that means executive and legislative combined can hold them to account. And if they don't turn up, they can be fired, because they are no longer "of good behaviour"

[@charliegolden7923]

And Republicans have been saying this for how long. You controlled every branch. Trump steps in and you used every branch against him knowing you were lying. Should they Is a no. Sometimes you have to make a point

[@burtnelson1987]

@@JelMain That is EXACTLY the way I was taught in school some sixty years ago! For all of my life I believed this to be true, but the current group of Judges seem to be re-writing things to suit themselves. The ongoing corruption with the Republican appointed judges is getting way too far out of hand.

[@op3129]

I think you forgot "should be." egregiously so.

[@JelMain]

@@op3129 No, I'm a legist appointed by a Supreme Court in another Nation and don't hedge my decisions around with unnecessary uncertainty. Your mess is caused by an Attorney General who in infirm in virtue. Yes, he has to prove his case, but for heaven's sake, isn't there enough evidence of what went on? He's trying to prove it "in absolute", but that's not what the Law calls for, which is "beyond reasonable doubt". Some thought he might have been waiting for the mid-terms, but no, that was half a year ago. It's beyond a joke, in six months the 2024 campaign starts, officially. It's not ridiculous, it's offensive.

[@ronwade5433]

Accountability is becoming a rare commodity

[@BigDanOz]

ALL government officials are accountable to WE THE PEOPLE, who pay their salaries. We the people are your bosses and you must answer to US. Period! And that goes for all 3 branches of government 👍 PERIOD

[@e-spy]

@Kraig StClair indirectly, they are. We vote in sane, uncorruptible people? Then we have a voice there. I recommend voting for candidates who do not take money from big business or lie about their entire resume. Otherwise, you are voting in a Thomas or Gorsuch. And I will add that this private meeting thing of senators and supreme court nominees should be public instead.

[@kevinbwillson4161]

Sen Whitehouse Thank you for guiding us through these challenges of Democracy the GOP seem to still be at their feeding troughs

[@badlyniceness2315]

Whitehouse for the whitehouse…

[@op3129]

@@badlyniceness2315 yes please. he's what the US needs.

[@danielortega2351]

We, the people, should have the right to impeach a corrupt judge.

[@dianestallings392]

They can be impeached. But the republicans like corruption, so the Thomas is what they like.

[@sumiland6445]

If the Supreme Court flaunts accountability and avoid all appearances of impropriety, refusing to come to the hearing will out the final nail in their coffins!!

[@jasoncoomer1226]

Exactly what do you actually think will happen? They have no actual constitutional power to do anything.

[@larry-kp9sp]

No it won't. It will just open the door for all judges to be as corrupt as they are.

[@e-spy]

if only. Not gonna happen whilst we have republicans controlling the house.

[@jamesricker3997]

The Democrats need to send Jonn Roberts a thank you note for giving them a very big campaign issue for 2024.

[@virginiagrundman4012]

God, yes.

[@blinkonceonsunday1325]

Just as important to separation of powers is another democratic tenet called "checks and balances." If right-wing justices want to argue separation of powers in this case, then they reject the idea of checks and balances. This is the very reason the Constitution gives Congress the power of Impeachment. If the president or a judge becomes corrupt, Congress has the authority to act, even in the case of Supreme Court Justices.

[@CatherinePearl100]

Now, that could be a problem, considering Congress is even more corrupt than the Supreme Court.

[@hemihead6645]

Impeach and lock'em up.

[@mimsyborogove3906]

Separation of power doesn't limit oversight in any other part of government. The idea that the Supreme court can say "We're subject to no one because we say so," just doesn't cut it. We need a referendum so that the American people can decide if a Supreme Court that answers to no one is acceptable. It's not. NO ONE is above the law or accountability.

[@barbiedahl]

No more honor System. Term limits. Mandatory retirement age. Emeritus status. Ethical standards. Financial disclosure. Rotation of Justices. Inspector General of the Supreme Court. 13 justices to oversee 13 Circuit Courts. (Actually, with population growth and demographic changes we now need 15 circuits with 15 justices to oversee them.) AND remove the five perjurers. Reform the Supreme Court now!

[@leagarner3675]

Agree. It's a job not an entitlement.

[@user-ij6vg8xq2r]

No wonder this is being referred to as "The Robbers Court"!

[@heatherwhaley7623]

This is Mitch McConnell's court in step with The Federalist Society. Trump was merely the useful fool/tool.

[@grahamcampbell8297]

The simple fact is the political nature of the American judiciary needs to be tempered by rotating judges on the Supreme Court. They can enjoy the federal judicial appointment for life, but if they are appointed to the Supreme Court they serve two years, or even one year, before then returning to the federal Court of Appeals. Each president would then appoint two to four justices in each term of office. I would also abolish the constant approval of the federal senate for each rank of judicial office. Once a judge is appointed to the federal bench as a justice that should be the end of it. Any promotions should not then be subject to further scrutiny, and politically engineered delays. Also, any vacancies on the federal bench should be filled within 60 days. The endless procedure is ridiculous. I would also limit all candidates by requiring them to obtain the approval of the American Bar association and the approval of a majority of other federal justices. This would weed out fanatics and people with a political agenda like that maniac in Texas and Alito, and Thomas.

[@annmoore8696]

Thank you Senator Whitehouse ⚖️ Good Show as Always Lawrence ❤️

[@mmonroe4738]

No one, and I mean no one should be above the law They have a code of conduct they're supposed to adhere to It's time for them to start adhering to it...

[@lewsouth1539]

How about asking the CJ if he's ever heard of "checks and balances"?!

[@gregwilliams3457]

Investigate there family members for braking the laws. Drag them through the mud Till you have the votes to impeach each and every one. Start playing hard ball. open up a senate hearing like jan 6th committee on them. You cant tell me this behavior is ok with rep.

[@ReformedRepublican]

I remember in 2016 begging people to vote for Clinton because of the Supreme Court. I didn't know much about Trump. I had never watched the his reality TV show. I did know that the next president would be appointing a Supreme Court Justice because there had been a vacancy that McConnell refused (unconstitutionally) to even give a hearing to Obama's nominee. I was afraid Mitch McConnell had a plan, and when Mitch McConnell had a plan, he put party 1st, so it would be bad for democracy. To give an unqualified president like Trump 3 Justices, because Mirch knew how to play the system, would void the legitimacy of the Court. I am not psychic, but l did go to school before the party of my yourh turned int the fascist party, and l learned to think critically. The outcome was even worsecthan l thiught. I never thought of the corruption, just the politics. And my fear that the Court would become an arm of the fascist element of the Republican party. I widh l had been wrong.

[@PuahalaHawaii]

Sen. Whitehouse is a good one. I'd like to see Lawrence Tribe be interviewed by O'Donnell on these troubles with the Supremes.

[@moonlightpixie9976]

So the court can just do whatever they want with no repercussions at all ?

[@llamamama75]

"what is the future of ethics on the Supreme Court?" That we hope to someday have some again.

[@rstritmatter]

A Justice who cannot sit before a committee and brief them on ethics is not qualified to be a Justice. It's that simple.

[@leagarner3675]

Yes.

[@exposingcriminals469]

This is indeed different times we are living in. Spooky knowing that this has been going on for decades meanwhile thousands of people every day are sent to prison for lesser offences. Time to clean house and get rid of the whack job republican party and replace it with the independents.

[@johnyoungman1947]

Please defend our Nation Democrats! This SCOTUS must be expanded! The current bench with its extremists Republican majority is irresponsible and militant. Our Nation can endure much struggle and opposition but the rule of law is essential to be successful and sustainable. Democrats we need you to recognize the reality that the SCOTUS must be expanded and swiftly.

[@kathrynsmigel4530]

Let's thank Mr.Trump.We shall do whatever we can get away with for as long as we can get away with it

[@markflores40]

From the tales of the bite-me crime family. 😊

[@lindacollier593]

We will never know or understand the MAGNITUDE of damage that Donald Trump's presidency & he himself have done to our democracy, our people, our nation and our world!!!

[@cecilelaforce3686]

Gotta love Senator Whitehouse! He just says it like it is.

[@reubenhandel210]

Example?

[@GetTheJabPlease]

*The dude has been living on Jupiter for the last decade. Supreme Court has been out of control for years now!*

[@charlottetracy3970]

Senator Whitehouse is a great senator!

[@charlesbeaudry3263]

Power and money are totally interchangeable. The only friction lies with corruption laws and ethics norms. So obviously the potential to exchange power for money will remain a big issue as long as SCOTUS refuses to deal with the problem.

[@Mike-ph5rn]

The Supreme Court should be held to SUPREME ETHICS. Total transparency. No outside income. If they really want to serve, it should be no problem.

[@andrewewels3054]

Corruption at the top is the tip of the iceberg ?

[@michaelmorris4515]

Congress has the authority to establish courts and it can set the scope of SCOTUS authority - Article III Section II "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make." Under this, the Congress can create a court to oversee the ethics of the SCOTUS as necessary. Therefore, I propose that whenever an investigation of any member of the SCOTUS is undertaken by the DOJ, a panel of 5 judges drawn by lottery from among the chief justices of the states shall oversee and try the case.

[@ArchmageMarlock]

No, this can't happen. 1) Congress cannot create a superior court to the Supreme Court. So we will not have a court overseeing the business of the Supreme. 2) The Supreme Court is a co-equal branch of government. This fact was not applied in your analysis, which changes everything. Co-Equal! 3) It is important to note that DOJ investigations of normal federal judge are a different process. Asking the DOJ to investigate an S.C. judge is like asking them to report to you on the actions of the U.S. president. In general, the S.C. Judge must be Impeached/Removed to Start the formal investigations. 4) Law school can address all your other questions and more. Remember, if you know what can never happen in the history of this nation, you can work toward better outcomes. :)

[@blinkonceonsunday1325]

It's a good idea, but I think it's better to have such arbiters removed from politics. Choosing state Justices who are often themselves elected politicians may create inherent bias on this panel. I think a citizen jury is probably more workable. Every other branch has some accountability to the voters, but not Federal judges or SCOTUS justices.

[@donnievance1942]

Thanks very much for this comment and for what you pointed out in the Constitution. I've read the Constitution a number of times, but it's very hard to intuit the significance of all its parts. That last phrase, "... and under such regulations as Congress shall make" could be game changing to the current set up. Now we need solid Democratic wins at the federal level in 2024 to make the power of that phrase effective. With a Congress that will use it and a President who will enforce what they institute, we might have some hope of straightening the Supreme Court out. We are very unlikely to get a 67 vote Democratic majority in the Senate by which we could convict and remove a Justice under impeachment, but the President could appoint more Justices and undo the fascist stranglehold on the Court. Furthermore, I believe that, while the Constitution prescribes the impeachment process as the only means of formal expulsion from the bench, the intent of the Constitution cannot be read as otherwise giving any person legal impunity while in office. Thomas has flat out broken the law, and he should be arrested, tried, and jailed. If the Republicans won't impeach a jailed Justice, then so be it. He would be effectively off the bench anyway.

[@ademolaonafuye3977]

@@ArchmageMarlock Because this has not happened before does not preclude it from happening. The letters of the constitution clearly provides for an exception to the SC jurisdiction. Congress can invoke its powers to codify supreme court ethics (there seems to be none) and create a court to hear case’s following the new law (check, balance the tilt of power). Your most salient point, which there may no getting around is that even if such a court made a ruling, then what? That ruling cannot supersede the constitutionally prescribed process of impeachment for removal a SC judge. It will not be enforceable. So its a lot of political expense for zero gain, a-lot of movement but no motion. There is a better way to clean up and hold SC justices accountable. It can definitely be done.

[@rgwak]

All federal judges: "We follow a code of ethics." Conservative Supreme Court Justices: "Hahaha, f*** that!"

[@tallymay7407]

Oh ya! Exactly what have they done? Do tell. Hurting your feelings doesn't count

[@Jude74]

What he’s not saying out loud is there are judges talking about what they can do when they know a decision from the Supreme Court was compromised with illegal gifts.

[@cyanmaelstrom]

If only this guy was president, then Whitehouse would live in the White House.

[@peter9477]

He'd also be better than the last 100 or so people who competed for the position...

[@PtolemyCeasar]

There's only one Justice on point here, the one with the free vacations and free planes. Just so we can narrow down the field.

[@brendacawston9236]

Complete power corrupts completely. They should have a term limit.

[@arcdecibel9986]

They don't have complete power, brainwave, they're beholden to the Constitution. Trump appointed three Constitutional Originalists for that very purpose. But even if they did, a term limit wouldn't fix anything because the Democrats have straight told you a hundred times that they want to pack the Supreme Court with their justices and have attempted it repeatedly. Those are the same people that say the Constitution is obsolete and can be re-interpreted to mean anything. You would literally be handing them absolute power.

[@rebeccaorman1823]

I don't know that is a good idea. Ideally, judges should decide a case based on the law not public opinion.

[@ArchmageMarlock]

They don't have complete power. They can be impeached. Moreover, Congress has the power to review the taxes of any American, including judges. To top that, the Executive and Legislative branches are supposed to vet the S.C. judges beforehand. This is a failure of the government to conduct due research into appointed positions. FYI, Life Terms keep our sovereign law consistent; however, the picking of justices was not supposed to be a political free for all.

[@tallymay7407]

So should every legislator!

[@yvonnetomenga5726]

@Brenda Cawston • Why? So the Justices are in a bigger hurry to grift? Term limits are not the solution to corruption. An enforceable code of ethics is the solution.

[@lauratomczak6797]

Chief Corruption. Chief Cop Out. Chief We Can Do Anything We Want

[@FearsomeR4Z3]

Sen Whitehouse PLEASE run for president in 2024! We need you! Please! Please!

[@peter9477]

Whitehouse is a national treasure. It's mind boggling that Biden and Trump are the best the parties can offer.

[@jjvsqz]

WOW....Justice sysyem has been for show this whole time in America. I was willing to give my life in the Navy for the USA and the Chief Justice will not give up an hour for the Senate because......?? Money is power in the Supreme Court of the US of A I can see now!

[@anonnimus]

Does the congress have any control over the budget of the Supreme Court? It seems that if you strip the majority of the budget for jusices staff, that might have some influence.

[@reubenhandel210]

Except didn't all the Justices just sign a unanimous letter saying the exact opposite?

[@jeffreywitczak9840]

If it's got to go down then the whole thing must come down.

[@larry-kp9sp]

These judges were appointed by our elected officials. Hold THEM accountable.

[@lauriesica]

With that response the justices definitely need oversight!!! It's seems that Justice Clarence Thomas was replaced by new justice Harlan Crow!!

[@tl1447]

TERM LIMITS PLEASE

[@SunnyRayFAmit]

"starting to 'alarm' other judges"... Sen. Whitehouse has just landed from Mars.

[@lairddougal3833]

There might not be actual corruption - at least as far as Roberts and Korsuch are concerned- but the perception of corruption is sufficient. Roberts, if he were worth his salt as a jurist, ought to be doing all he could to address this.

[@jocelynlopez6858]

Roberts has no balls to clean up his court

[@teutonalex]

You’re not packing the court by removing a black judge you don’t like. Stop it.

[@abberepair8288]

Not a Supreme court but an F-Troop!

[@diytips4028]

IRS should audit

[@michaeldiogenesbest6127]

Subverted Court Of The United States.....

[@thenorthernspinozist397]

There is no doubt that the Supreme Court IS out of control and there are three good remedies for this. 1. Term limits will help dislodge them when they have been there for a certain number of years--say 15-20 years, which is plenty long enough for any of them; no more life time appointments, this is a "dinosaur" left over from the 18th century. 2.YES! a WRITTEN code of ethics is needed, which seems to be in most cases working well with the lower courts. A written code of ethic serves to remind the Justices as well as spell out exactly what ethical standards must be upheld. Justices are human and all humans need to be reminded from time to time where the ethical line is. Finally, they rule on the most difficult issues that come before their Court, often of these issues are of an ethical nature bringing the total number of Justices to 13, which mirrors the current number of circuit judges would bring more meaningful discussion and thus better rulings.

[@winewoman224]

Indict them! That will get their attention….

[@ruthmusser4449]

Impeach.

[@kathyd1970]

No one is above the law. If the other arms of govt have rules, ethics, and means of reprimanding/removing members, why does this one part not have those in place? It seems silly to lock it all up except the one part.

[@Michalis1948]

I had said before, judges should have a 4-year term. They should stop thinking they are above the law and can take their jobs forever until their last day on earth.

[@tallymay7407]

4 years? Omg bahaaahaa. So should your dem lawmakers then also!

[@yvonnetomenga5726]

@MichalisAngelos • Term limits are not the answer to corruption. An enforceable code of ethics is.

[@Michalis1948]

@@tallymay7407 "your dem??" I am not earth human.

[@janicenelson7639]

@@tallymay7407< Moronically incoherent, maga-scared, MAGA hat Putin Bot-Butt Troll ⚠️ 📢

[@aotearoawhanau7211]

I takes me less than a few hours to translate the code of ethics of a SOTUS in another democratic country that would not infringe anything in our constitution. Just push it through Congress or let SCOTUS vote on it in case its independency blocks Congress. It is no big deal to get a result. I really do not understand why this has not been finalised yet.

[@Rnankn]

Busted.

[@raulescandon4485]

Den. Whitehouse is bright and insightful and a great public servant.

[@laura-gp3gv]

Alarm??? They should be completely disgusted.

[@suemccord2633]

BRAVO🎉🎉🎉🎉

[@theway414]

Dear Senator Whitehouse, the voters are well beyond alarmed and infuriated! We are furious and disgusted and we want action, fairness and accountability

[@shahnulislam9897]

Are you seriously going to ask the judges if YOU could put a coffee if ethics in? Subpoena them

[@Gerryjournal]

So, independent oversight is viewed as interference? Who's taking care of the care takers daughter when the care takers out taking care?

[@yavengo3647]

Time to impeach Thomas, Alito and Roberts ... All at once ....

[@wendydabee]

If you are only 'starting' to be alarmed.... you haven't been paying attention.

[@mountainsofevidence]

“You shall not distort justice; you shall not be partial, and you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and perverts the words of the righteous. Deut. 16:19”

[@ssb1056]

Can the judiciary committee send those questions to the Chief Justice written by the Senator!???

[@FnRenner]

It is past time for the USSC to have term limits. Same as with the Senate and the House. Politician should not be a career, it should be a short term calling. No more dragging a single issue out to run for office on for 80 years. Get in, get it done, move on.

[@sharon94503]

Some (not I) would say that the Supreme Court (think about that title for a moment) has the power of "God" because it is untouchable and almighty. I say that if the Bible can be rewritten from it's original (?) version, so too can the cannon of rules that govern the SC.

[@mikemiller3069]

I can't believe that the word, "ethics" and "the Supreme Court" are mentioned in the same sentence.🙄

[@jamiebrotherston2241]

Paying the rent for the mother. Unbelievable. Undermining the rule of law.

[@pontificusvascillious5287]

" ... where does this go from here" revolution ...

[@jamesmcgeever9405]

If they won't regulate themselves it's time the people regulate them.!!!!!

[@raoulhubris]

There is absolutely no reason for Leonard Leo to have the political influence he pursues within the profession.

[@tofu_golem]

Starting to? Starting to? This proves that our entire Injustice system is beyond reform. PS-If the Supreme Court can ignore past Supreme Court rulings, them so can everyone else.

[@NDARYBC]

These crooked SC Justices must be judge"s for abusing Policy...

[@bman3983]

i think they need to go

[@ohotnitza]

Time to stack the court

[@mackthenight]

Starting?

[@theway414]

But I thought Justice Thomas mostly liked vacationing in RV, checking out Walmart in rural America 🤔🤔😳

[@shwemoor]

Judge that you not be judged: where is the Republican voice in this impropriety, or are they part and parcel.

[@zerothm1]

Just stack it already. Why all the BS.

[@djpomare]

I fought the law and the law won. So, I paid the law and I won.

[@KingGreen78]

How about explore term limits you're a lawmaker right

[@waltermachnicz5490]

Another example of irresponsibility! Clueless or criminal? Separation of power is not meant to evade law! This is conservative style BS. Guilty is guilty.

[@aaronwilcox6417]

Every branch is rifle with corruption.

[@mountainfisher4183]

What Criminal Wants To Be Asked Questions About On Going Crimes ?

[@toddanonymous5295]

The fact is, six of the Justices alarm three of the others. On the other hand , three of the Justices alarm six of the others. What should alarm all of us is the left only want Justices, judges, DA's, legislators, and dog catchers that adhere to their ideals. They want total , unlimited power. They ignore half of the country that do not agree with them. What is the answer to the growing division we are seeing in the US. Looking at the history of the world, the answer may not be a pleasant one. The two main methods are either civil war or splitting the country into separate ones. The earth is a graveyard of lost civilizations. Each failed civilization is usually followed by a long dark age . We are seeing the early signs of failure. That should alarm us more than Justices we don't agree with.

[@engineered-mind]

You think lol 31% approval rating and dropping lol

[@janicenelson7639]

@Engineered Mind < Moronically incoherent!

[@damham5689]

The Judicial branch is independent from the other 2 branches of govt, and is totally under the control of The Federalist Society and Corporations. 🤦Duh.

[@niclewis9610]

It sounds corrupt but without accountability and investigation how can you trust them it's not. Sounds like conflicts of interest but there is no open and transparent oversight.

[@seanc1898]

Showcasing corruption and arrogance for all to see in broad daylight. Sad