General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsScalia's Hunting Trip Was a "Gift" From a "Friend" Who Had Business Before the Supreme Court
The two men already had a tenuous connection outside of the ranch. Last year, an age discrimination suit filed against the Mic Group, a subsidiary of J.B. Poindexter & Co., reached the Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case.
In an email to the Post, Poindexter said Scalia, who was invited to the ranch as a personal guest, was not charged for his stay. A person familiar with the ranchs operations tells the paper Poindexter typically hosts these free events two to three times a year.
Poindexter added: The Justice was treated no differently by me, as no one was charged for activities, room and board, beverages, etc. That is a 22-year policy.
Poindexter explicitly denied paying for Scalias charter flight to the ranch and declined to identify the friend who accompanied Scalia or any of the other guests on the trip.
http://gawker.com/scalias-hunting-trip-was-a-gift-from-a-friend-who-h-1759637837
Baitball Blogger
(46,768 posts)hoosierlib
(710 posts)And their definition of bribery is a fucking joke...poor Gov. McDonnel will have to go to prison now...
Merryland
(1,134 posts)Guessing it was a love interest since no one is exposing her/him
OregonBlue
(7,755 posts)pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)"The trip, the Washington Post reports, was a gift from the ranchs owner, who just last year obtained a favorable result from the Supreme Court."
The other friend, Poindexter said early on, was one of Poindexter's friends, an invited guest who also was friends with Scalia. When that guest's son canceled at the last minute, Scalia was invited.
"All the guests were friends of mine, I paid for all of them. There were no politics, no jurisprudence in the slightest," he said, declining to name the other guests.
"It was an honor to have him. He was widely admired. There were no speeches. He wasn't asked any hard questions, it was all about the outdoors and Texas, and what it's like to being a Supreme Court Justice."
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/transportation/article/Ranch-owner-laments-loss-of-Scalia-6830769.php
B Calm
(28,762 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)but meh, Scalia was going to rule as a conservative no matter what. An opinion has to be written and make sense. They can't just decide to corruptly favor someone and not have it exposed.
catbyte
(34,484 posts)The Supreme Court is a cesspool of Republican special interests. Thomas' wife is a Tea Party leader. The Supreme Court is supposed to be non-partisan. Yeah, what a sick joke.
underpants
(182,949 posts)That wasn't the Presidential suite.
Just to give you an idea.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)They take tips in cigarettes.
2naSalit
(86,834 posts)Rose77
(57 posts)OneoftheOnes
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)he was just listening to speech
thesquanderer
(11,995 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Rot in Hell Judge Dickhead, the world is a much better place without you.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)so that evil ratfuckers like Scalia could be punished for the damage they have wrought.
Rex
(65,616 posts)since so many seem to be afraid that it does exist. True, Judge Rotten is now just powder sitting on a mantle somewhere.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)is that Scalia believed in it.
MH1
(17,608 posts)(my apologies to anyone who finds that in bad taste)
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)Every other Federal judge.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)SCOTUS is the only branch of the federal judiciary explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. All other federal courts fall under the "Congress shall create such other courts as..." clause.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)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.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Refers back to the scope of appellate Jurisdiction. It's part of a prepositional phrase and you have to look at the subject of that object.
In other words, this clause authorizes most of Title 28 of the US Code and, in particular, Part IV. (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28)
This is not some sort of blanket "Congress can regulate any aspect of the court it wants" authority, nor would we want it to be.
There have been crank legislative proposals, for example, for Congress to ban abortion and also specify that the Supreme Court would not have jurisdiction over that statute.
JudyM
(29,293 posts)I was thinking the other day that Scalia should've been disbarred years ago.
Ginsberg apparently felt that he was all about the integrity of the Court, about honoring it as an institution.... And yet he has done more to destroy its integrity than anyone I know of.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)JudyM
(29,293 posts)And as for Scalia, no doubt there will be study halls, law libraries, etc named after him. He ought to go down in infamy but he won't.
LiberalAndProud
(12,799 posts)How is this different from ordinary socializing? He visited for a hunting trip weekend a year after declining to hear a case. I don't see anything terribly nefarious about this. What am I missing?
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)The petition was denied on Oct 15th of last year, so in all likelihood the trip was already on Scalia's calendar prior to the denial.
So did or could the trip have influenced Scalia? Probably not. The case had already been denied all the way up the line for failure to establish prima facie (which is very common in discrimination cases). 98% of all the petitions submitted to the SCOTUS are denied, and this one appears to be pretty straightforward. The petitioner was fired (according to the company) because his impropriety cost them $194K, and he subsequently filed an age discrimination suit against them.
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca5/14-20616/14-20616-2015-05-06.html
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)in actual fact, any judge, and a Supreme Court justice especially, should have made every effort to avoid even the appearance of impropriety or a conflict of interest. The fact that this is raising an alert, even if it were ultimately proven to be groundless, shows that Scalia did not.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Scalia has consistently shown he completely lacks the integrity required to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. So there's no question Scalia had no qualms about tarnishing the image of the court. That's just part of what made him an absolute piece of shit.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)yourout
(7,534 posts)Fat Tony was nothing but a mob lawyer with a black dress
^^^^^^^
You win with that one!
lastone
(588 posts)just like thomas, taking gifts from people he'll soon preside over.
tell me again why we should not all be dancing on this assholes grave?
malaise
(269,215 posts)NOT - corrupt scumbags all. I shed no tears - good riddance.
TygrBright
(20,772 posts)monicaangela
(1,508 posts)the "liberal" judges immediately recuse themselves if they have even and appearance of impropriety when it comes to judging a case, and "conservative judges like Thomas and the late (thank God) Scalia mingled with many who had cases before the court, even attended meetings/galas, you name it the Koch brothers have had...political meetings by the way, and I don't believe I have ever seen either of them recuse themselves even though they know the case is like the one being discussed in this article. We really need to insist we get better from our Supreme Court, our Congress, and our Presidents...after all, this "government" is suppose to be of by and for the people, not just the few that we send to Washington D.C. or our local and state governments to represent us, not just 1% of us.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)Can we examine the gifts/connections for the rest of the SCOTUS? And Congress?
It's time to pull "the curtain" All the way back.
Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)Presumably such people would lose their sinecures once criminal charges have been made to stick?
fredamae
(4,458 posts)I'm not at this time-confident that those who have the power (currently) to act on behalf of the people would do so out of fear they and Their "friends" may also be exposed?
Reality being absolutely exposed shatters any small hope some still have that all we have suspected could never actually happen in America.
What a mess.
lark
(23,166 posts)He had no concern for ethics or morals, would blatantly go on a hunting trip with Cheney days before he had a case scheduled that was directly about him and Cheney paid all the costs. Would blatantly take a trip from Poindexter before he heard that case. He was vile and venal and the best thing I've EVER heard said of him was that he had a great sense of humor. Guess he thought it was funny when he was destroying our constitution and putting the unelected and worst president ever in office just as a favor to him and his family.
I totally revile the man and am not sad one bit at his passing.
eppur_se_muova
(36,305 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Corruption will work
yellowcanine
(35,702 posts)It is not as if they are going to go back and agree to hear the case because Scalia gets a hunting trip. Much ado about nothing, I think.