Scalia and Thomas dine with healthcare law challengers as court takes case

[cal04]

Source: Los Angeles Times

The day the Supreme Court gathered behind closed doors to consider the politically divisive question of whether it would hear a challenge to President Obama’s healthcare law, two of its justices, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, were feted at a dinner sponsored by the law firm that will argue the case before the high court.

The occasion was last Thursday, when all nine justices met for a conference to pore over the petitions for review. One of the cases at issue was a suit brought by 26 states challenging the sweeping healthcare overhaul passed by Congress last year, a law that has been a rallying cry for conservative activists nationwide.

The justices agreed to hear the suit; indeed, a landmark 5 1/2-hour argument is expected in March, and the outcome is likely to further roil the 2012 presidential race, which will be in full swing by the time the court’s decision is released.

(snip)
“This stunning breach of ethics and indifference to the code belies claims by several justices that the court abides by the same rules that apply to all other federal judges,” said Bob Edgar, the president of Common Cause. “The justices were wining and dining at a black-tie fundraiser with attorneys who have pending cases before the court. Their appearance and assistance in fundraising for this event undercuts any claims of impartiality, and is unacceptable.”

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-scalia-thomas-20111114,0,7978224.story

[muntrv]

1. What? No hunting with Cheney?

[TrollBuster9090]

73. I doubt even a corrupt sack of shit like Scalia would ever accept

an invitation from Cheney to go duck hunting again. At least not without bringing an arch welder's mask, or something.

But seriously, Thomas, Alito and Scalia are just thumbing their noses at the American justice system at this point. Being a corporate shill who's sitting on the highest court in the land is ONE thing, but actually FLAUNTING their corruption and influence peddling in such a blatant way is another. They're even embarrassing the movement conservatives, and that's not easy to do. How long do we have to put up with these scumbags before SOMEBODY grows a spine and tries to impeach them? Or at least pass some legislation in Congress on a code of ethics for supreme court judges, and then dare them to overrule it.

[Enthusiast]

85. Beautiful............nt

[zbdent]

107. actually, the "invitation from Cheney" is an implied threat ...

"Hey, if you don't vote Right, you get to go hunting with Cheney ..."

[Tanelorn]

131. Sadly very funny

[alp227]

2. Recuse. NOWWWWWW!

[sakabatou]

17. Scalia and Thomas: What is this word, "recuse?"

[wordpix]

19. They think they are above the law ---should be MADE to recuse, the clowns

[Mister Ed]

83. Above the law? They think they ARE the law. n/t

[SomeGuyInEagan]

126. Yup. Thomas and Scalia can do anything they wish - nothing will happen to them.

I am not saying that is as it should be, but that is what it is.

Perhaps is has always been this way, but as Lewis Black once pointed out, at least they screwed us behind closed doors. Now, there isn't even a hint of shame or impropriety with the monied elite in this country.

[Joe Bacon]

134. It's not only them

It's Kennedy, Roberts and Alito too. And because they are all corrupted Republicans they will get away with it!

[ooglymoogly]

137. Sadly and dangerously, they are the law....

which makes this country a dictatorship, presided over by fascist pigs.

[bl968]

40. Wrong word...

I prefer the word Impeach!

[bulloney]

129. Recuse is as foreign to Thomas as filling out financial disclosure forms.

[RaleighNCDUer]

148. Recuse,hell. IMPEACH. nt

[plumbob]

3. Can we at least know the AMOUNT of the payoff, please?

Might be handy to know for future reference.

[TheEuclideanOne]

51. At a dinner with the people arguing the case?

Do these guys have no sense of shame? Has it gotten to the point where they don't even try to hide it? Not even a little bit? I am guessing that you should simply follow them on Twitter so you can find out the amount of the payoff when they tweet it.

[AlbertCat]

58. Has it gotten to the point where they don't even try to hide it?

They're flaunting it.






The Roberts court.... not creditable

[MinneapolisMatt]

4. ............

:argh:

[enough]

5. They exert raw power and they want us to know it. That may be the difference

between Scalia and Thomas and all the rest of the Justices. These two take delight in flaunting the fact that they wield raw power. That is what they are about.

[CrispyQ]

6. The lack of integrity & ethics is partly why there is an Occupy Wall Street.

These people have no shame. None.

[truthisfreedom]

7. If you got it, flaunt it?

Christ. My outrage button has been pushed so many times that it's stuck on now.

[usregimechange]

8. Lower court judges can't do that

[reggie the dog]

70. yes they can

my lawyer made me pay 10 000 in cash, for 45 gram pot offence that would have gotten me ten years in virginia,

MY LAWYER THEN WENT AND PLAYED GOLF WITH THE JUDGE AND "LOST" MONEY TO HIM GAMBLING

the result, i was found innocent after 5 minutes.

[red dog 1]

9. This is Disgusting!

[leftyohiolib]

11. and some people still dont understand ows

[wordpix]

21. Fat Tony never turns down a meal & Thomas likewise.

Yeah, they're totally disgusting :puke:

[zbdent]

108. bet Thomas bussed the tables, too ...

like the good "servant" he is ...

[usregimechange]

10. Contact your reps today, they need to be in deep water for this

[wordpix]

20. how about impeaching them both? May be the only way

[leftyohiolib]

12. s special thanks to the people who sat out the 2010 elections

if we kept the house this could have been addressed

[usregimechange]

13. We just have to make sure they show up in 2012

[Dutchmaster]

28. yeah, like those justices we tossed out in 06, 08, and 10. Yup, good call.

[Dutchmaster]

29. replied to wrong guy,

but you get my drift hopefully :)

[leftyohiolib]

88. it is a good call. btw i said we could not would

isnt it better to have the house? i dont get the post. just because they didnt then, they shouldnt have the house? just because they didnt then doesnt mean they wont now.

[rfranklin]

14. Would it have been?

I doubt it.

[davidthegnome]

35. Suggestion

Rather than condescending towards those who did not vote, let's try to offer them something (or, as the case may be, someone) worth voting for.

You are but preaching to the choir. Most of the people here probably voted, but for the few who may not have, I certainly don't hold it against them. The political game has long been rigged. I'll vote the lesser of two evils, but I do so with less enthusiasm every time I go to the booth.

You aren't going to inspire or encourage people to vote by knocking them for not voting.

[freshwest]

42. +1,000

[Lorien]

54. Special thanks to the people who applauded Obama's move to the Right

which betrayed every person who worked and voted for him in 2008 and disenchanted many of them from ever voting again (I voted, but obviously our votes mean very little anymore. Same old, same old). He TOLD you to "hold his feet to the fire", but you refuse to do anything but cheer.

[MilesColtrane]

60. I hate to inject a note of sense here, but...

what does Obama have to do with Scalia, Thomas, the Federalist Society, Bankroft PLLC, or the National Federation of Independent Business?

I'll answer that for you...nothing.

You see, what the above people are trying to do is OVERTURN the law that Obama signed. They're also trying to force one of his Supreme Court Justices to recuse herself from the case.

[Enthusiast]

86. +1000!

[cui bono]

122. Exactly. The ones who blindly support him and can't stand him to be criticized

are the ones who are hurting this country the most.

And it kills me when I see those same people posting in OWS threads "supporting" that cause. They don't see how hypocritical it is.

[cui bono]

121. Good thing we came out in full force in 2008 to elect Obama

so we could get Geithner and co. installed directly in the White House and then have back door deals so the health insurance industry could decide what type of HCR they wanted.

Whoo-hoo!!! If only we could do more of that!!!

:applause:
















:sarcasm: ...............(because yes, it really is necessary :eyes:)

[Sarah Ibarruri]

15. These two are dog crap. We need to alert people about these two evil a-holes nt

[usregimechange]

16. Send this to the top of the greatest page now!

[lonestarnot]

18. And Grimace, who's he dining with, Roberts and Satan?

[The Backlash Cometh]

22. OWS the Supreme court.

Those two have no respect for the law.

[wordpix]

25. methinks OSC is a good idea

[ejbr]

23. These som' of o beches have no shame n/t

[wordpix]

24. yet they want Kagan to recuse herself. No way!

[Dutchmaster]

26. they don't even try to hide it anymore.

[Enthusiast]

87. That is reason for alarm.

"The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater."
— Frank Zappa

[Liberty Belle]

27. What does it take to impeach these sell-out bastards?

[wordpix]

32. it would take a Dem Congress & get rid of the T-partiers in the House

[jmowreader]

44. 67 Democratic Senators

Impeachment requires two-thirds majority, and we're not going to get any Republican help.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

53. Correction: 67 REAL Democratic Senators, not all those sellouts we have now

:grr:

[jmowreader]

146. That goes without saying

[Blue Owl]

30. Side order of bribery, anyone?

Make it a double.

[Lucky Luciano]

31. They Don't even pretend to be impartial. They feel immune to ethics.

A bad trait for judges!

[wordpix]

34. can't a bar association do something? You'd think the justice system would take care of their own

megalomaniac arrogant bastards ruining the country.

[tcaudilllg]

46. Not really, because you don't need creds to sit on SCOTUS.

However...

[No Elephants]

133. You should need ethics. However, the Supremes are above the law.

Unless they get impeached, and fat chance of that.

[ArcticFox]

72. They are immune

Ethics rules don't apply to supreme court justices. They may claim to abide by them, but no one can do anything of they don't.

[RyanPsych]

33. In any other courtroom in the United States, this would be a huge conflict of interest

yet these tools get away with it frequently...

:argh:

[wordpix]

37. even my small town land trust directors would not have dinner with developers who wanted to donate a

property. The directors said to the developers, you want to talk business, we'll do it in our office. No drinks, no hors d'oevres, no dinner.

[Enthusiast]

89. But who knows after the example set by this SCOTUS.

As if the nation did not have enough of a problem with corruption and influence peddling.

[dotymed]

102. They have laws for conduct for every other Judge in America.

The "Supremes" are above those laws. In any other court, they would be arrested.

[DissedByBush]

36. Damn, reading too fast

I read "Scalia and Thomas die..."

Quit screwing with my emotions like that!

[Jakes Progress]

38. Requiescat in pace, USA

You had a nice run.

[Occulus]

39. Congress needs to remove these two unethical shits from the bench.

These men, Thomas in particular, are not worthy of the position of county magistrate, much less a seat on the SCOTUS.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

41. They are just flaunting their corruption.

[The Second Stone]

43. I think that they should be impeached and removed

for this.

[tcaudilllg]

45. +infinity

[valerief]

47. Judicial ethics are a quaint concept today. nt

[lovuian]

48. OMG!

they are so unbelievable

[Deep13]

49. The remark about Kagan would be well taken anywhere else.

But as it is, the deck is so stacked against the public interest that anyone who might favor reform simply cannot afford to step aside.

My prediction: Kagan recuses herself and Kennedy votes with the fascists as he is increasingly prone to do.

[KeyserSoze87]

50. Everyday, I dream of these two corporate whores getting impeached from the SCOTUS.

:mad:

[Hubert Flottz]

110. That's a great dream...

Those two are true scoundrels to the very core. Their power has eaten their souls.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

52. Recuse or be impeached

Nothing more to say about that.

[mvd]

140. I'm thinking impeached if their vote is bought off

This may go beyond recusal.

[DFW]

55. This needs to be on page one or page two from now to March n/t

[ChadwickHenryWard]

56. It seems like every week there is some new breach of ethics or conflict of interest

involving Scalia, Thomas, or both, and has been for as long as I can remember. The complete and total disregard for propriety is stunning.

[defendandprotect]

57. Obama made back room deals with Big Pharma and private H/C industry ....he set the pace!!

[AlbertCat]

98. Obama made back room deals with Big Pharma and private H/C industry ....he set the pace!!

At least he made them in a back room...

[Oldtimeralso]

59. RECLUSE THEMSELVES OR IMPEACH n/t

[MilesColtrane]

61. They take great pleasure in rubbing their corruption in the faces of...

the American people.


These corporate bullyboys should remember that the Great Karmic Wheel may turn slowly, but its turning is inevitable.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

117. Yes...I wish it could turn a little quicker, sometimes. n/t

[Ter]

62. I don't care for one major reason

No matter who they dine with, they are a lock to vote against it anyway. They aren't swing votes where dining could potentially influence them.

[SoapBox]

63. Oh...My...GAWD! How unethical can this be!!!!

I post and post and post...about the Five Activist Judges on the court.

THIS is beyond stunning.

We're doomed, when these Radicals do shit like this.

Un---Freak'n---Believable.

[davidthegnome]

64. Justices from the supreme court...

behaving like this?

Scalia and Thomas have always disgusted me, but this is beyond all tolerance. Time for someone to consider ethics, morality - and if nothing else, law. Conflict of interest. Hello? Can't someone fire these assholes?

[robertpaulsen]

65. I can hear their retort, "If you think we can be bought for one lousy dinner..."

"That's less than Rick Perry was bought for!"

[still_one]

66. just curious, where are the congressional democrats? have they said anything about this? /nt

[JDPriestly]

67. Scalia and Thomas have made the Supreme Court a laughing stock.

No one can really believe that decisions are made without winks and nods at political allies anymore.

This is a travesty of justice. It looks like these particular justices have taken sides on the issues they decide before the briefs are submitted or the arguments heard. It looks like they just decide in favor of their ideological buddies.

Thomas should not be on the Supreme Court. He misrepresented his financial situation for years.

[JudyM]

74. +1 They claim to be truer to the Constitution than their left-leaning 'breathren', but...

they could not be farther from the spirit of it.

Starting with Bush v Gore, just unabashed political decisions. They decry how devoid of morals the country has become yet they are absolutely the worst of it.

Like Congress, the Supremes need stricter conflict of interest rules. But who's going to make that happen?

[fasttense]

77. You are right, These greedy traitors to democracy on the Dancing Supremes are a laughing stock.

But it involves more than just winks and nods at their allies.

It involves selling their votes to the highest bidders. It involves ignoring the Constitution, We The People and the rule of law.

I wonder what Scalia sells his vote for? Does Thomas ask for more? Are their votes about equal in cost? Do they offer two-fers?

Would it matter what your party affiliation would be if you backed it up with big bucks? Can a Democrat buy their votes as easily as the corporations and law firms do?

Does it have to be money? Are sex and drugs a good purchase medium for their votes too?

The questions about Scalia's and Thomas' bribery costs are just never ending. I think Americans should know the price these criminals charge.

[Beartracks]

68. And then they used the constitution for a napkin. n/t

[reggie the dog]

69. this is normal, this is how justice works.

I was busted with 45 grams of pot, the DA asked for 10 years. I paid 10 000 to a lawyer who went and played golf with the judge (and bribed him too i think) and i was found innocent after 5 mintues in court.

Money buys justice in the usa so it is only normal that the supreme court functions like a smaller court, money talks. i dont think it should be this way, i am just pointing out reality.

[lib2DaBone]

71. Scalia and Thomas.. why am I not surprised?

[No Joe]

75. Why doesn't this surprise me?

:(

[toddwv]

76. I would love to see two SCOTUS judges impeached.

Seems as though they don't care anymore.

It will never happen with a Republican House.
It won't even happen with a Democratic House.
SCOTUS judges are practically untouchable.

[pam4water]

78. K&R

[deminks]

79. There were 3 justices in attendance, two were listed on the program as speakers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2307856&mesg_id=2307856

Paul Clement, atty for parties that challenged the law, sat at a table between Thomas and Scalia.

Sammy Alito was also in attendance.

[SpiralHawk]

80. Republicon Family 1% Values

against America...as usual.

[Enthusiast]

90. You forgot cesspool.

[tomp]

81. obama should raise the issue publicly.

frankly, i think mandated insurance purchase sucks and i would love to see it struck down by an impartial court (operative word: IMPARTIAL).

i assume the justice dept is handling this case and that is obama's domain.

[Doctor_J]

82. Republicans have become the USSR politburo

no pretense of ethics any more.

[spicegal]

84. It's a sad day in this country when the highest court in

the land loses so much credibility. When you can predict how it will vote on any issue based on the conservative ideologues now dominating the court. And now they're dining with attorney's arguing cases before the court. They don't even care if there's a pretense of being objective. Ever since the Gore v Bush case, I lost all faith in the SCOTUS. They've become nothing more than another partisan body, a partisan body with lifetime appointments tasked with making big time decisions that seriously impact our lives.

[mwb970]

91. Scalia and Thomas make me sick. They are scum. /nt

[abelenkpe]

92. This should be illegal nt

[Turbineguy]

93. Maybe the rest of the Court

will feel the need to un-sully the Court's reputation.

[SHRED]

94. No conflict here...nope...none at all

I don't agree with the mandate to purchase from the corporate thieves but no matter where you stand on any or all parts of the Affordable Health Care for America Act you have to admit that the above is not good.
Especially considering the hard time CONs are giving Sonia Sotomayor on this topic.

---

[sarchasm]

95. No shame.

In their minds they are untouchable.

[No Elephants]

96. DISGRACEFUL!

[AllyCat]

97. This is just stunning. The average person can't get a break ever

and these people get the open door to folks who are supposed to be impartial.

[CanonRay]

99. Alito and Roberts were there to, in drag

as their dates.

[RoccoR5955]

100. They should recuse themselves NOW, or face removal.

This just is not fair. They are supposed to be IMPARTIAL. This can be seen as a conflict of interests, especially if we found out that the justices did not pay for their own lunch!

[dotymed]

101. Obviously, OSC is necessary. If we cannot get our

obviously corrupt (if they allow these SCOTUS "Justices to escape impeachment ) federal politicians to impeach or at least censure these "Justices," then their vote needs to be grounds for the end of their political career.

When the Supreme court of the land is so obviously corrupted by money and ideology, they need to be marginalized. Whatever it takes, these people who are in the majority of our "third arm" of government, must be prosecuted.

Can Obama "pack" the SCOTUS just like FDR threatened to do?


edited for clarity

[wordpix]

104. SCOTUS is a power above even the elected reps & president :-(

and these people aren't even voted on. Why they're the final word is beyond me.

[olegramps]

103. This is exactly why there should be term limits of 10 years.

[hifiguy]

105. That is, in my opinion, grounds for

immediate impeachment of both these corporate whores.

[zbdent]

106. They're not even bothering to hide it any more ...

this country's f*cked ...

[Hubert Flottz]

109. Somebody has to tell 'em how to vote.

They aren't smart enough to figure it out on their own.

[patrice]

111. "Justice" = a super-meta-instance of Regulatory Capture

[FlyByNight]

112. Accountability is for the 99%

But not for the 1% and their sycophants. Can't say I'm surprised though. These two are flat-out legitimate fascists.

Venal pricks.

:mad:

[xxqqqzme]

113. nominees for worst persons in the world?

[Magleetis]

114. It's a big club

and we are not in it. Democracy is dead in the USA.

[xxqqqzme]

115. Ahhh, you need to read to the end

to get the full picture ...."...conservatives argue that it’s Justice Elena Kagan who has an ethical issue.... Kagan served as solicitor general...when the first legal challenges to the law were brought at the trial court level. Her critics have pushed for Kagan to recuse herself from hearing the case, saying that she was too invested in defending the law then to be impartial now. Kagan has given no indication she will do so...."

Fat tony and too-stupid-to-be-a-justice first.

[GreenTea]

116. This is as disgusting as it comes - Elitist power-mad Scalia & Thomas are truly sickening our system

[efhmc]

118. They are scum but the judgment in the case is a

forgone conclusion. What I want to know is how this case got before them so quickly.

[tblue37]

119. They don't even make an effort any more. The fix is in, and the

fixers don't even think they need to present a semblance of propriety to keep the peasants in line.

[benld74]

120. RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE!

RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! RECUSE! And if they DO NOT, I give 5-2 odds, they find the law and ALL of its componenets unconstitutional!

[stevenleser]

123. This is who these two guys are

The only ethic of the conservative members of the USSC seems to be "How best can I do the bidding of the 1% at the expense of the 99%

[DreamSmoker]

124. K&R

[Skink]

125. Obama needs another pick

That alone is why he gets my vote.

[LiberalEsto]

127. A bit of Lewis Carroll would seem appropriate here

"I passed by his garden, and marked, with one eye,
How the Owl and the Panther were sharing a pie:
The Panther took pie-crust, and gravy, and meat,
While the Owl had the dish as its share of the treat.
When the pie was all finished, the Owl, as a boon,
Was kindly permitted to pocket the spoon;"

From The Voice of the Lobster in "Alice in Wnderland" by Lewis Carroll

[jbpdx]

128. Supreme Crap

I can't say what I'm thinking about these two pieces of crap, but you can probably guess...

[KamaAina]

130. Not even trying to hide it anymore, are they?

:eyes:

[KamaAina]

132. Impeach!

[certainot]

135. two trophies for the ignored talk radio monopoly- thomas, and no single payer, 3 w/scalia

1000 coordinated radio stations, ignored by the left, reaching 50 mil a week for 20 years distorting the health care issue and lying about single payer is the main reason why we couldn't even get public option.

and limbaugh getting a free speech free ride on hundreds of stations to attack anita hill and sell clarence thomas is why we have clarence thomas.

and even the unqualified scalia wouldn't have been on without the ignored talk radio megaphone moving the perceived center to the right and helping republicans win and steal elections.

all because the 'left' has no organized response to the right's best weapon and barely even knows what's being blasted from those 1000 radio stations and how often.

[SunSeeker]

139. So true. I listen to Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes--but I'm in a tiny minority

Outside of big cities like Los Angeles (where Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann and Randi Rhodes on AM 1150 in the morning and early afternoon) progressive talk just doesn't exist. Even on AM 1150, come 4 pm they've got a Wall Street Journal program on.

[certainot]

143. randi rhodes is one of the few who properly credits RW radio with last 20 yrs of disaster

sad that some progressive still think 95% is RW because of market forces instead of because it's a well established, subsidized and protected monopoly.

somehow in a country that voted overwhelmingly for obama 95% is RW.

[russspeakeasy]

136. Follow the money.

[mvd]

138. They have got to be recused.

Certainly Kagan should not do so until both of them do. This is what the Occupy movement is talking about - the monied interests even can reach up to the highest Court in the land. The Occupy movement HAS to grow.

[avebury]

141. Talk about conflict of interest - nt

[Firebrand Gary]

142. A democracy hijacked for the 1%.

[Golden Raisin]

144. All 3 branches of our government

are dysfunctional.

[samsingh]

145. they have CONTEMPT for the law

[madrchsod]

147. that would end up with a either a 6 or 5 making the decision

[Democat]

149. Why is this not a crime?

If you offered gifts to the judge hearing your trial, you'd be arrested.