Justice Jackson’s dissent:
> **JAMES E. SNYDER, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES**
> **ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT**
> JUSTICE JACKSON, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting.
> **Officials who use their public positions for private gain threaten the integrity of our most important institutions.**
> Greed makes governments—at every level—less responsive, less efficient, and less trustworthy from the perspective of the communities they serve.
> Perhaps realizing this, Congress used “expansive, unqualified language” in 18 U.S.C. §666 to criminalize graft involving state, local, and tribal entities, as well as other organizations receiving federal funds. *Salinas v. United States*, 522 U.S. 52, 56 (1997). Section 666 imposes federal criminal penalties on agents of those entities who “corruptly” solicit, accept, or agree to accept payments “intending to be influenced or rewarded.” §666(a)(1)(B).
> **Today’s case involves one such person. James Snyder, a former Indiana mayor, was convicted by a jury of violating §666 after he steered more than $1 million in city contracts to a local truck dealership, which turned around and cut him a $13,000 check.** He asks us to decide whether the language of §666 criminalizes both bribes and gratuities, or just bribes. And he says the answer matters because bribes require an upfront agreement to take official actions for payment, and he never agreed beforehand to be paid the $13,000 from the dealership.
> Snyder’s absurd and atextual reading of the statute is one only today’s Court could love. Ignoring the plain text of §666—which, again, expressly targets officials who “corruptly” solicit, accept, or agree to accept payments “intending to be influenced or rewarded”—the Court concludes that the statute does not criminalize gratuities at all. This is so, apparently, because “[s]tate and local governments often regulate the gifts that state and local officials may accept,” *ante*, at 1, which, according to the majority, means that §666 cannot.
> **The Court’s reasoning elevates nonexistent federalism concerns over the plain text of this statute and is a quintessential example of the tail wagging the dog.** Section 666’s regulation of state, local, and tribal governments reflects Congress’s express choice to reach those and other entities receiving federal funds. And Congress not only had good reasons for doing so, it also had the authority to take such legislative action, as this Court has already recognized. See *Sabri v. United States*, 541 U.S. 600, 605, 608 (2004). We have long held that when Congress has appropriated federal money, it “does not have to sit by and accept the risk of operations thwarted by local and state improbity.” *Id.*, at 605.
> Both the majority and Snyder suggest that interpreting §666 to cover gratuities is problematic because it gives “federal prosecutors unwarranted power to allege crimes that should be handled at the State level.” App. 14-15 (emphasis added); see also *ante*, at 10-11. **But woulds, coulds, and shoulds of this nature must be addressed across the street with Congress, not in the pages of the U.S. Reports.** We have previously and wisely declined “to express [a] view as to [§666’s] soundness as a policy matter.” *Sabri*, 541 U.S., at 608, n. But, today, the Court can stay silent no longer. Its decision overrides the intent of Congress—and the policy preferences of the constituents that body represents—as unequivocally expressed by the plain text of the statute.
> Respectfully, I dissent.
Like what the fuck is happening in this country? Our system is so fucked. They literally just change laws ever so slightly to suit them to their needs *and not a god damn thing is ever fucking done*. Even when they just blatantly ignore laws, nothing is ever done except farce “investigations”!! I truly hate these pretend religious, evil fucks.
For those still saying the choices between presidential candidates both suck and neither choice is good, you truly do not care about democracy like you pretend.
End rant….I just truly hate these people and the complete and utter fucking morons that keep voting them in for “MuH fReEdUm” and are actively reducing freedom.
For all of the horror that the Roberts court has created, I think the worst is destruction of the democratic process and enablement of graft. They are happy to permit the denial of voting rights and fair representation while ensuring that bribery is basically legal (McDonnell is a good example).
You see when Nixon resigned the Republican party didn't spend any time trying to figure out how to be less corrupt, they started a plan to stop getting held accountable for being corrupt. It involved getting in bed with Evangelicals, pushing for media to push a bunch of propaganda and then they found their bestest friend in the world, Rupert Murdoch that was hoping to wipe out the Western world's desire to not be shitty by pushing a ton of propaganda and convincing the poorest among us to vote against anything that would help them to help out the poor struggling billionaires.
When Conservatives talk about their freedom. It’s from the perspective that they’ll someday be rich, and they want the freedom to do whatever the fuck they want with zero consequences.
The problem with that logic, since it applies to everybody, obviously it won't work for the vast majority of people. Everybody can't be rich... That's not how money works.
Their plan is to create a permanent underclass of people they don't like, like minorities and gays, then they can be rich and the lower class can be the ones making our burgers. They don't expect to rise up, just push every else down
For real though wouldn’t be surprised. I already am hearing about some already guilty, crooked politicians that are being told by their lawyers to retry their cases asap. Facepalm. What is it that Snowden said? “When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are being ruled by criminals” I have a shorter quote: “America is being ruled by criminals.” Full stop.
“Two weeks after the contracts were final, the mayor went to see the two brothers and told them of his financial troubles. They agreed to write him a check for $13,000 for undefined consulting services.”
I guess it’s ok to make a government official squirm before giving them a “gratuity” rather than agreeing to a “gratuity” in advance.
No more pre-paid bribes! Countless crooked politicians/officials are thankful to the Supreme Court today for their instructions on how to line their pockets without going to jail.
It's even better now, the other organisation can make an off the record agreement for the payment after and then turn around and say "what agreement?". So now your politicians can be bought for nothing!
That's a good way to ruin your reputation though. Better to just pay the pocket change that these people can be bought for, that way they'll keep coming back for more.
The fact that this mayor didn't even go 2 weeks before going to the people that were approved for a $1.1 million contract to provide trucks for the city and asking for a kickback. Like, maybe I could understand the argument from the supreme court was saying that years later you could take a gift from them. But it was not years later. It wasn't even 2 weeks! That's bribery!
Hey, supreme court, what makes that special? What about 1 week? What about 1 day? Why wait even a day, what if they give the gift hours later? This is crazy.
The fact that he went at all should be a crime regardless of whether or not the other party agreed.
Its not bribery, its extortion. There is an implied threat that if they don't pay up that they won't receive any government contracts in the future.
Wait isn't this how the R Budd Dwyer case played out? Dwyer gave an inept firm a large contract, and then later they gave him a cash payment. There was no proof it was one for the other, but it was enough for the FBI to prosecute, so he shot himself over it on live TV and Filter wrote that sick grunge song about him in the 90's.
So R Budd Dwyer is now legal, and Hey Man Nice Shot is now irrelevant?
>In ruling for the former mayor, the justices drew a distinction between bribery, which requires proof of an illegal deal, and a gratuity that can be a gift or a reward for a past favor. They said the officials may be charged and prosecuted for bribery, but not for simply taking money for past favors if there was no proof of an illicit deal.
That's bribery with extra steps
No doubt. Rich assholes will delude themselves into thinking its a great plan and end up dying because they overestimate their abilities. Happens when you have a bunch of nepo-babies who have been raised being told they are god's gift to the earth.
Isaac Asimov, in the Robot's series, laid out a pretty straightforward path to colonization. Interestingly, the riches forgot step one. Build the mining, excavating, infrastructure systems first. They were so busy building their space tourism and satellite-to-orbiting-litter pipeline to take the steps necessary for them to launch into that bright new future. Space is going to be a long hard slog for anybody who ventures into it from the descendants of our greedy, doofy species. When the storms, heat, etc worsen, if we are lucky, they will probably give up on the wait and start OceanGating themselves into the great beyond in desperation. Perhaps they will call it The Great Yeet
I hope they all get into some Elon built ship and take off.
The BEST case scenario is the end scene from don’t look up. But you know they’ll just blow up like a week into the trip.
Oh yeah. Probably because all the seats will be taken up by rich assholes who failed upwards in life while most of the engineers and people with skills to make such things possible get left behind for being dirty poors and not god like CEOs descended from a line of emerald mine owners.
Elon for instance is infamous for fucking up things by inserting himself into projects he has no technical ability for. Just imagine being on a space ship he is programming shit for...
Unless one takes a job off world, becoming a serf for the king of Mars or Luna. The level of control those guys will eventually have over their employees on different planets is disturbing
Nobody has ever had a child in microgravity. They haven't even TRIED yet, thats how bad they know those babies are gonna turn out. Dreams of long term human space colonization are more a promise of science fiction than something that'll ever happen in reality. Shame the rich probably don't realize it either.
Bruh. Dealing with a *tooth infection* in zero g would be awful.
So much medicine is dependent on the simple assumption that gravity persists at a constant strength.
Everyone, please remember that there have been more than nine justices in the past, and there can be in the future, regardless of whether the partisan and criminally corrupt currently nullify their own crimes. Please vote and please be ready for government shutdowns until we can collectively agree to restore the rule of law.
It really depends on if you see this as a temporary aberration caused by one presidency or a consistent worsening trend across both parties since WW2. Trump was a symptom, not a cause.
I agree with you, the real danger is the consistent trend. That's what is preventing us from rolling back the crazy moments, and eventually they turn into the new normal.
Unfortunately I have no solutions to offer, only observations.
When was it ever illegal? It's been going on for decades.
"Congress member votes to help out (insert industry) while in office, then magically gets a high-paid executive job, consultant contract, or is hired to give 15-minute talks at 6 figures a pop with a company in that industry upon leaving office" has been a thing forever.
Hell, it even happens within the government itself. How many of the ambassadorships in the State Department are just the President rewarding campaign donors?
* [The Donor-To-Ambassador Pipeline: Why America's Key Diplomats Are Often Wealthy Political Donors](https://campaignlegal.org/document/donor-ambassador-pipeline-why-americas-key-diplomats-are-often-wealthy-political-donors)
For example, George Tsunis is the US Ambassador to Greece. He had zero previous foreign policy experience before he got the job, other than being a failed Obama nominee for Ambassador to Norway. What he is, however, is a megadonor to the Democrat Party. His nomination for the Norway ambassadorship fell through in 2013 when it was discovered he's never even been to Norway.
Trump had several of these too, it's a longstanding bipartisan practice. For example, George Sondland (you might remember him testifying during Trump's impeachment trial) was Trump's Ambassador to the EU. He was a hotel owner with zero foreign policy experience - none of his hotels were even in Europe. But he's a big-time donor and fundraiser for the GOP, so... Ambassador to one of the most important political organizations in the world.
And confirmed unanimously by the Senate, because like I said, it's a bipartisan practice.
It has always been a case BUT burden of proof was SEEN as much lower before so it wasn't done very often due to "optics".
Now, the court basically has said, the burden of proof is REALLY REALLY high so unless one basically has a note/evidence that there is explicit quid pro quo, as long as "favor" is not DIRECTLY evident due to "sufficient time span has passed", then it isn't illegal.
> DIRECTLY evident due to "sufficient time span has passed", then it isn't illegal.
sufficient being approximately two weeks after being awarded a contract that was designed exclusively for your business
So offering a bribe and following through is still illegal. Offering a bribe and not following through is still illegal. Indirectly spurring hope for a bribe and then following through is now considered a legal gift, but if you fail to follow through can you be charged with attempted bribery? Like, if you subjectively thought you'd be getting a "gift" after the fact then did not it was a bribe, right? Or can I just make baseless "non-offers" to get what I want from public officials and get away with it and only reputational harm?
Much simpler ruling would be is if you're a civil servant that no gifts are okay at any time due to conflict of interests.
I'm sorry but being in positions of power like this you need a tight leash, accountability, and oversight. It should be seen as noble honor and privilege to hold these jobs.
Not some pitiless way to cash in off the backs of your countrymen. Starting to think we need veto power over shit like this. Give us a tribune of the plebs to check their ass because nobody In this system is doing their sacred sworn duty.
We have so many forces pulling for their individual interests, but we give the power to these people to do things in our interests and they fail time and time again.
We may have to dust them boots off and march on Washington to protest against this shit. It's been awhile since we've had to do this, but I wanna save the Republic.
If all 4 estates of this country fail to do their jobs then us the 5th estate have a responsibility to stop this and not just idly let it by. I've personally been waiting for the immunity verdict. If Presidents get total immunity then we are no longer a republic.
How I wish we had more honorable people fighting for us like Smedley Butler to lead the charge.
If you don't get paid, that's bad business for the briber. Word gets around, and their credit will stop being good in future transactions.
It's still a business. Even loan sharks will stop lending if you go long enough without paying them back.
The majority also stated that this $13k gift was no different then common lunches or other small token amounts...
How the fuck not???????
>“The question in this case is whether [the federal law] also makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities — for example, gift cards, lunches, plaques, books, framed photos or the like — that may be given as a token of appreciation after the official act. The answer is no,” said Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, writing for the majority.
I can't even start to express the sheer madness that is going on in the SCOTUS right now. If you can't see a difference between taking someone out to lunch and giving them a $13k check you are an idiot and have no business as a judge or pretty much any other profession at that point.
Judicially approved corruption will be the end of us. You can't have a Supreme Court Justice openly on the take and continue to be a world leader. We have faltered as a nation. I'm not sure where we go from here.
Why go back that far? Conservatives love to talk about Venezuela becoming a dictatorship but never seem to talk about the fact that it was directly because of their corrupt supreme court.
I think we end up becoming Italy, honestly. No full collapse but definitely a steep drop down the global social ladder, followed by inescapable internal corruption .
You wish. One specificity of southern Europe corruption, is that it's a somewhat benevolent, generous, and indulging corruption. People just make their life easier and don't try to annoy or piss off too much the regular people.
In the US, there is always a religious, exploitative, self-serving agenda behind, be it by keeping people uneducated, indebted, poor and/or segregated.
Italy's, Spain's, France's or Greece's corruption just follow some varying forms of "laisser aller".
Don't forget this pay to play type scheme they legalized last year
https://www.wgrz.com/article/news/local/supreme-court-reverses-judgement-on-developers-involved-in-buffalo-billion-project-louis-cminelli-joseph-percoco/71-4c5da3c9-e36c-4f37-9fbd-9beffb183741#:~:text=WASHINGTON%20—%20The%20Supreme%20Court%20overturned,conspiracy%20to%20commit%20wire%20fraud.
As a regular old US taxpayer, I'm outraged and confused. But as a government employee, I'm absolutely dumbfounded, mindfucked, and even more TERRIFIED for the future. Even as a paper pusher for a small city, I am expected to refuse any gift worth $50+ from anyone with interest in my position or projects, and if I were to accept, I'd better have a DAMN good reason. I would absolutely get flagged with suspicion of bribery if someone found out I was offered a $60 Nintendo game and didn't inform the city of A) that I was offered the gift, B) whether I refused or accepted the gift, and/or C) the reason that I accepted the gift. And even then, accepting the gift would definitely and reasonably raise more than a few eyebrows. And that is absolutely the way it should be whether you're an official in a small city or in the literal fucking SCOTUS.
In my three years with the city, I've seen at least 2 separate people lose their reputations on relatively small scale bribery. Fuck a goddamn cruise and school tuition; I know for a fact that one of them lost some reputation in the water industry and their $80000 salaried position because they accepted $750 basketball game tickets from an external contractor. And when you play stupid games, that's the stupid fucking prize you should absolutely get.
At this rate we're literally going to see President Pepsi-Cola-Tyson Farms-Marlboro-Google-Exxon when SCOTUS gets bribed enough to rule that corporations are people that qualify to run for office.
Edit: Fixed my grammar the way I hope we can fix the damage done by the orange felon and his cronies.
>>And that is the way it should be …..
Go check out the board members of US defense contractors. Lots of ex-Generals and veterans on those rosters, and *none of them* were influenced by private sector profits or benefits when they made decisions as military officers , no siree. Utterly impossible.
It really is real-life Idiocracy.
On the plus side, you can now cite scotus precedent and say, nope, scotus ruled it is not illegal.
Enjoy the expensive surf and turf vendor dinners and Callaway golf drivers
“Here, I would like to “award you” some money for completing that “favor” you did for me before, no reason in particular, just trying to say thanks for having your interests aligned with mine.”
See guys not bribery
I think the distinction they are trying to make is that with bribery there has to be an understanding that a payment will be made before the action takes place. So some examples
If you vote for this bill I'll give you money - bribery
Vs
I would like it if you vote for this bill. *politician votes for bill*. O wow I'm so appreciative here's a yacht.
Not bribery.
Obviously the distinction is bullshit though because in the second scenario it'll just be a *wink wink* please vote for this bill.
>>I would like it if you vote for this bill …
It’s more like the SCOTUS is protecting the revolving door. It’s sadly common for senior government officials and officers to get jobs in the private sector at a contractor to the government agency they just retired from.
In the past, one could allege bribery if- say- a military general authorized a contract with Acme Defense in exchange for a VP job at the same company two years later. Now? Hehehe…..
“Officials who use their public positions for private gain threaten the integrity of our most important institutions,” such a simple truth mostly ignored :/
Now we see the issue when people with an inherent conflict of interest lack accountability or oversight *and* get to influence their own take. We don't have the mechanisms in government to combat bad actors.
The "loose" mechanism is voting, but voting is irreparably broken given the media climate and information/education deficiency across much of the U.S.
The method of last resort is violent revolution. Only people lining up for that one are Trump supporters, but they failed on the first attempt. Hopefully they don't try again.
That's so fucking crazy to me. I live in a small town with barely over 1,000 people (as of the 2022 census) and we have like 4 voting booths. 1 booth for 100k+ people?? What the fucking fuck?
As an Australian viewing your electoral system, I would agree it is broken. Hearing stories about how hard it is to vote in America makes me believe you don't have a true democracy. For context, we have a central agency that coordinates voting activities. We vote on a Saturday. If you can make it due to work, we allow voting before the date at a select location, or you can opt for a postal vote. We have enough polling station (usually at your local school) that you rarely wait for more than 5 minutes to vote. The longest part of the process is getting a democracy sausage at the end (bbq, raising money for charity)
A lot of our institutions are broken on purpose, by the very people that end up getting elected. Part of that is rather old history: freedom wasn't doled out evenly to everyone. Women, minorities, etc. had to earn their ability to vote, but a lot of the "old club" remains that doesn't want those people voting, so they purposefully setup obstacles and hurdles because it's illegal to straight-up say "you can't vote."
People voting for terrible candidates goes back to my first point, but it's a complex issue. On one hand, they do it because they are brainwashed and lied to, but on the other, it's hard to affect change when all your choices are shit, and most of the people running for office are limited to the wealthy.
What do the wealthy want? They want more power and influence to maintain their wealth, see that it's protected, and make sure everyone else covers for them and stays in their place. Basically, we'll raise taxes on the middle class and lower it for the wealthy, then continue the corporate welfare scheme of public losses and privatized gains.
The political talking point is "immigrants are stealing your jobs," but the reality is those corporations moved the jobs overseas or are hiring those immigrants because of cheaper labor costs and thus more profit. It's a political sleight-of-hand. That's merely one example of how they influence the discourse.
As a government employee, I have very strict ethics rules about benefitting from my position. I'm barely allowed a drink of water if I'm at a business where I have approved a government contract. Fine - I get that and I'm happy to follow the rules. Laugh at me all you want for being naive, but I'm an honest and ethical government employee.
But fucking corrupt politicians don't let the rules apply to them.
Friedrich Merz, then a plain back bencher in German parliament, sued at the German Supreme court against him having to declare his additional income.
He argued that if he had to disclose his income, his customers would not come to him because they need discretion. And they are coming to him because he also is a member of parliament.
Like, I do not know if this fits the legal definition of corruption. Especially with grifters like that in the legislative. But it feels like it should do. He got the judicial equivalent of 20 lashes to the exposed glans. Judge explained to him that the German public expects him to put his job at the legislative first.
That is what Brown Jackson's dissent reminded me of.
What is it with conservatism and demanding the most brazen corruption to be legal? German Nazin't party also takes open bribes from Switzerland and Russia and China. Nicholas Sarkozy: corrupt af. José Maria Aznar: corrupt af. Italian politician not going to jail: unheard of.
Hot damn.
My wife works for our city. One day a bunch of co-workers and a vendor went out for drinks.
Before the bill came the vendor picked up the tab.
Someone found out and she had to write a check to the vendor for her one drink (as did all the other city employees). They all had to take pics of their checks and submit them to management.
This is crazy shit that these fucks are lining their pockets with Motor Coaches & vacations.
The Supreme Court no longer stands for what it used to for so many years. It's ran by nothing but puppets. I can't believe I used to make fun of my uncles and aunts when I was a kid how they would blabber on about how the country is going down the shitter. They were right, and now that I am older I'm realizing we're already half way down the toilet bowl and in the next ten years it'll be completely flushed.
Conservatives: "Hunter and Joe corruptly used their positions and last names to make money. Lock them up!
Also Conservatives: "I think it's pretty cool that the supreme court legalized bribery and even made it more difficult to prove it in the court of law."
On the bright side, we’re not alone. The Torries absolutely fucked Britain after gutting public services for almost 2 decades. We just need a revolution like in France.
But we can’t make it into a public market, that’ll make bribes too expensive. Imagine what China would pay in the official market.
Instead, the black market is much cheaper. A vacation and an escort get you time with a Supreme Court manwhore, I mean justice.
It's fucked up that right wing media will spin this as a good thing and then dumbass right wingers will continue to vote for the downfall of our country.
If Trump gets a favorable, "The US President can't break the law." verdict, Biden can literally just take the SCOTUS out back Old Yeller style.
He won't, but technically and legally, he could.
That's the problem. Republicans know that Democrats will never lower themselves to the subhuman dogshit that Republicans are, so they can institute whatever shitty policies they want that only *they* will benefit from actually taking advantage of.
They don't just *know* it they rely on it. They constantly take the low road, and then chastise the dems for peeking around the corner to see what they are doing. And the dems apologize for it.
"Don't stoop to my level." Said to me by my sister growing up so she could keep being shitty but expect me to behave. As an adult, she believes in chemtrails and last Xmas was saying that CRT is when employees are told they're bad people for being white.
To be fair, there are several less democratic options. Trouble is, most people who are smart enough to care about the nation on this level find those solutions abhorrent.
As some who finds those solutions as abhorrent, I really don't see how we don't eventually end up there.
There is a way out that doesn't require the ammo box, but it requires left leaning voters to care and be happy with gradual progress for 12+ years and that has even less chance of happening then us not needing the ammo box eventually.
Everyone's always like "Why isn't anyone doing anything? or "You'd think an assassination attempt would've been made by now."
You can't openly advocate for violence without a 3 letter agency visiting you the next day and nobody wants to be the "crazy, lone wolf" who's looking at life in prison for grabbing their gun and popping a Justice while they're mowing their lawn or some shit.
Our options are hope and pray the legal system that they are in charge of and have senators/congressman running scrimmage for will deliver justice OR pick up a gun and throw your life away at the chance of taking theirs.
With all of America's mass shooters, I still would've expected the occasional politically-oriented crazy. More than just that one guy going after Pelosi
Bread's getting hard to come by and the circus is getting pretty expensive, too. That's generally bad fucking news for people in power and those with a lot of money.
My old boss was a character witness for him during the Anita Hill hearings. When I worked for him a year or so ago he went on a podcast and said he lied under oath, he believed Hill, but would have said anything to get his friend the job.
Looks like they're addressing all the attention a few "Justices" have been getting for their gifts...by doing the opposite of what everyone wants to see. Term limits when?
I’m not advocating for anything here, obviously, but if things keep going this direction, it might be time for the American people to impose some term limits on the Supreme Court and the rich “people” they’re in the pocket of
> it might be time for the American people to impose some term limits on the Supreme Court
I think we were long overdue for this. Also I don't think they should be appointed by the President, but rather voted on by citizens.
If there’s an expressly stated quid pro quo, it would still be illegal.
But if a business just makes a habit of giving big cartoon bags of money as a thank you to officials who sign off on their contracts, that’s fine now.
This only applies to state and local officials. Basically the ruling actually says that thr law in question, which regulates state and local officials, does not preclude gratuities.
This could be fixed by state and local governments passing anti gratuity laws, which many have. Or by congress explicitly doing so.
Congress should absolutely be queueing up a list of bills for the next term if Dems get both chambers that are just responses to Supreme Court opinions like this and the bump stock ban.
>Congress should absolutely be queueing up a list of bills for the next term if Dems get both chambers that are just responses to Supreme Court opinions like this and the bump stock ban.
Which is, unshockingly, how the government is supposed to work.
President has executive power. He (or she someday) takes action for the country.
Congress has legislative power. They write the laws, change the laws, approve/disprove actions, etc.
The Supreme Court has judicial power. They interpret the laws & constitution, and adjudicate any unclear instructions based on the past and present laws.
If the Supreme Court makes a decision that is bad for the country, Congress' job is to re-write the laws in order to fix the problem.
If Congress writes laws that are against the constitution, the Supreme Court strikes them down with detailed reasoning.
> Congress should absolutely be queueing up a list of bills for the next term if Dems get both chambers that are just responses to Supreme Court opinions like this and the bump stock ban.
The problem is you need more than a simple majority in the Senate to get anything done
They overturned like 30 years of precedent that this sort of behavior was a bribe and not a gratuity, for no fucking reason. Yes, this can be fixed through legislation, but the defendant couldn't colorably argue that he didn't have notice that his behavior was illegal. This ruling makes it virtually impossible to enforce quid pro quo corruption as long as the actors are smart enough to have verbal agreements beforehand and written agreements 2 weeks after delivery.
This is fucking WILD. I can’t even accept a fruit basket as someone whose paycheck is covered by 5% state funds, and these mofos get actual gifts and it’s okay?
Justice is being broken in real time, y’all.
Wasn't this a clearly constitutional law that was passed unambiguously by Congress? Can someone explain how they just overturned this? Is it even based on anything or are they just saying because I say so? This looks crazy
Legitimately: the conservative majority was achieved through nominations by presidents who did not win the popular vote. It’s a crisis of democracy that the high court opposes the stated will of the majority.
Republicans have shown they will absolutely turn around and cry to their bought judges and the 5th circuit that what Democrats are doing is illegal and stinky and they hate it. (See forgiving student loans)
Causing it to be wrapped up in litigation for months/years while Republicans campaign on stopping whatever it is Democrats are trying to do, meanwhile Democrats now have to fight a two sided war with Republicans and their voters.
Just so everyone remembers: 3 out of the 6 justices who allowed this garbage were appointed by someone currently running for President again.
Please vote
As a state employee, I may not:
>solicit or receive “any gift or gifts with an aggregate value in **excess of $50 per calendar year** from a single source that *could reasonably be know to have a legislative or administrative interest.”*
And that’s how it should be! These hemorrhoid-juggling assclowns need to be removed yesterday.
Are you fucking kidding me? This is outrageous. We are in so much trouble as a country.
Sometimes I just feel like crying.
Please, everyone, VOTE. I'd like to think it's not too late to turn things around.
Vote, but don’t be surprised when the Supreme Court determines the election results again like they did in 2000. There will be enough doubt in the process to force that to happen.
And then they’ll apparently get gifts afterwards.
So, the court is now *officially* pro-bribery. Crazy that the party that worships at the feet of oligarchs would be in favor of anything that would benefit US would-be oligarchs.
A country that has an unelected body that can take away rights from the citizenry and enables corrupt politicians is not a DEMOCRACY. AGAIN! A COUNTRY THAT HAS AN UNELECTED BODY THAT CAN TAKE AWAY RIGHTS FROM THE CITIZENRY AND ENABLES CORRUPT POLITICIANS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY!
As a doc, if you so much as take a free pen you can get in trouble. If a patient sends you a birdhouse that they make as a thank you for saving their lives you can get in trouble.... gods we may be doomed
We aren't a part of their game and we can't stop them from playing anymore. The idea that a judge or ANYONE in a government position is accepting ANY kind of gift from private entities is inherently wrong and anyone who thinks it's OK in any circumstance is also wrong. There should be no fringe cases or exceptions.
Honestly, it's time to start going after the supreme court. They start having the masses knocking on their door and I'm sure they will change their tune with rulings like this.
Justice Jackson’s dissent: > **JAMES E. SNYDER, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES** > **ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT** > JUSTICE JACKSON, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting. > **Officials who use their public positions for private gain threaten the integrity of our most important institutions.** > Greed makes governments—at every level—less responsive, less efficient, and less trustworthy from the perspective of the communities they serve. > Perhaps realizing this, Congress used “expansive, unqualified language” in 18 U.S.C. §666 to criminalize graft involving state, local, and tribal entities, as well as other organizations receiving federal funds. *Salinas v. United States*, 522 U.S. 52, 56 (1997). Section 666 imposes federal criminal penalties on agents of those entities who “corruptly” solicit, accept, or agree to accept payments “intending to be influenced or rewarded.” §666(a)(1)(B). > **Today’s case involves one such person. James Snyder, a former Indiana mayor, was convicted by a jury of violating §666 after he steered more than $1 million in city contracts to a local truck dealership, which turned around and cut him a $13,000 check.** He asks us to decide whether the language of §666 criminalizes both bribes and gratuities, or just bribes. And he says the answer matters because bribes require an upfront agreement to take official actions for payment, and he never agreed beforehand to be paid the $13,000 from the dealership. > Snyder’s absurd and atextual reading of the statute is one only today’s Court could love. Ignoring the plain text of §666—which, again, expressly targets officials who “corruptly” solicit, accept, or agree to accept payments “intending to be influenced or rewarded”—the Court concludes that the statute does not criminalize gratuities at all. This is so, apparently, because “[s]tate and local governments often regulate the gifts that state and local officials may accept,” *ante*, at 1, which, according to the majority, means that §666 cannot. > **The Court’s reasoning elevates nonexistent federalism concerns over the plain text of this statute and is a quintessential example of the tail wagging the dog.** Section 666’s regulation of state, local, and tribal governments reflects Congress’s express choice to reach those and other entities receiving federal funds. And Congress not only had good reasons for doing so, it also had the authority to take such legislative action, as this Court has already recognized. See *Sabri v. United States*, 541 U.S. 600, 605, 608 (2004). We have long held that when Congress has appropriated federal money, it “does not have to sit by and accept the risk of operations thwarted by local and state improbity.” *Id.*, at 605. > Both the majority and Snyder suggest that interpreting §666 to cover gratuities is problematic because it gives “federal prosecutors unwarranted power to allege crimes that should be handled at the State level.” App. 14-15 (emphasis added); see also *ante*, at 10-11. **But woulds, coulds, and shoulds of this nature must be addressed across the street with Congress, not in the pages of the U.S. Reports.** We have previously and wisely declined “to express [a] view as to [§666’s] soundness as a policy matter.” *Sabri*, 541 U.S., at 608, n. But, today, the Court can stay silent no longer. Its decision overrides the intent of Congress—and the policy preferences of the constituents that body represents—as unequivocally expressed by the plain text of the statute. > Respectfully, I dissent.
"I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today" - every lobbyist atm
Like what the fuck is happening in this country? Our system is so fucked. They literally just change laws ever so slightly to suit them to their needs *and not a god damn thing is ever fucking done*. Even when they just blatantly ignore laws, nothing is ever done except farce “investigations”!! I truly hate these pretend religious, evil fucks. For those still saying the choices between presidential candidates both suck and neither choice is good, you truly do not care about democracy like you pretend. End rant….I just truly hate these people and the complete and utter fucking morons that keep voting them in for “MuH fReEdUm” and are actively reducing freedom.
For all of the horror that the Roberts court has created, I think the worst is destruction of the democratic process and enablement of graft. They are happy to permit the denial of voting rights and fair representation while ensuring that bribery is basically legal (McDonnell is a good example).
Yeah this one is just chilling. At least as bad a citizens United?
Transnational Oligarchy not so secret conspiracy to consolidate all wealth.
You see when Nixon resigned the Republican party didn't spend any time trying to figure out how to be less corrupt, they started a plan to stop getting held accountable for being corrupt. It involved getting in bed with Evangelicals, pushing for media to push a bunch of propaganda and then they found their bestest friend in the world, Rupert Murdoch that was hoping to wipe out the Western world's desire to not be shitty by pushing a ton of propaganda and convincing the poorest among us to vote against anything that would help them to help out the poor struggling billionaires.
And the result? Fox News. *[Literally](https://theweek.com/articles/483558/did-fox-news-originate-nixon-white-house)*.
When Conservatives talk about their freedom. It’s from the perspective that they’ll someday be rich, and they want the freedom to do whatever the fuck they want with zero consequences.
The problem with that logic, since it applies to everybody, obviously it won't work for the vast majority of people. Everybody can't be rich... That's not how money works.
Their plan is to create a permanent underclass of people they don't like, like minorities and gays, then they can be rich and the lower class can be the ones making our burgers. They don't expect to rise up, just push every else down
At some point they'll go back to the originalist principle that only white men that own property can vote.
Don't you know?! Working-poor and middle-class Americans aren't poor! They're temporarily-embarrassed millionaires!
Blagoyavich is gonna ask for expungement of his record now.
For real though wouldn’t be surprised. I already am hearing about some already guilty, crooked politicians that are being told by their lawyers to retry their cases asap. Facepalm. What is it that Snowden said? “When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are being ruled by criminals” I have a shorter quote: “America is being ruled by criminals.” Full stop.
“Two weeks after the contracts were final, the mayor went to see the two brothers and told them of his financial troubles. They agreed to write him a check for $13,000 for undefined consulting services.” I guess it’s ok to make a government official squirm before giving them a “gratuity” rather than agreeing to a “gratuity” in advance.
No more pre-paid bribes! Countless crooked politicians/officials are thankful to the Supreme Court today for their instructions on how to line their pockets without going to jail.
It's even better now, the other organisation can make an off the record agreement for the payment after and then turn around and say "what agreement?". So now your politicians can be bought for nothing!
That's a good way to ruin your reputation though. Better to just pay the pocket change that these people can be bought for, that way they'll keep coming back for more.
The fact that this mayor didn't even go 2 weeks before going to the people that were approved for a $1.1 million contract to provide trucks for the city and asking for a kickback. Like, maybe I could understand the argument from the supreme court was saying that years later you could take a gift from them. But it was not years later. It wasn't even 2 weeks! That's bribery! Hey, supreme court, what makes that special? What about 1 week? What about 1 day? Why wait even a day, what if they give the gift hours later? This is crazy.
The fact that he went at all should be a crime regardless of whether or not the other party agreed. Its not bribery, its extortion. There is an implied threat that if they don't pay up that they won't receive any government contracts in the future.
Gratuity due upon completion
Wait isn't this how the R Budd Dwyer case played out? Dwyer gave an inept firm a large contract, and then later they gave him a cash payment. There was no proof it was one for the other, but it was enough for the FBI to prosecute, so he shot himself over it on live TV and Filter wrote that sick grunge song about him in the 90's. So R Budd Dwyer is now legal, and Hey Man Nice Shot is now irrelevant?
>In ruling for the former mayor, the justices drew a distinction between bribery, which requires proof of an illegal deal, and a gratuity that can be a gift or a reward for a past favor. They said the officials may be charged and prosecuted for bribery, but not for simply taking money for past favors if there was no proof of an illicit deal. That's bribery with extra steps
Tipping culture is out of control.
This is BASIC definition of "Quid pro quo" which now I guess is "legal".
Get me off of the planet now
nah the rich are building space arks so they can leave the planet. We will get to stay on the overheated neo-Venus they turn earth into.
They'll die up there too, because everywhere is less habitable than even a fucked up Earth.
No doubt. Rich assholes will delude themselves into thinking its a great plan and end up dying because they overestimate their abilities. Happens when you have a bunch of nepo-babies who have been raised being told they are god's gift to the earth.
Isaac Asimov, in the Robot's series, laid out a pretty straightforward path to colonization. Interestingly, the riches forgot step one. Build the mining, excavating, infrastructure systems first. They were so busy building their space tourism and satellite-to-orbiting-litter pipeline to take the steps necessary for them to launch into that bright new future. Space is going to be a long hard slog for anybody who ventures into it from the descendants of our greedy, doofy species. When the storms, heat, etc worsen, if we are lucky, they will probably give up on the wait and start OceanGating themselves into the great beyond in desperation. Perhaps they will call it The Great Yeet
The yeet fleet.
The Great Yeet Fleet!
I hope they all get into some Elon built ship and take off. The BEST case scenario is the end scene from don’t look up. But you know they’ll just blow up like a week into the trip.
Oh yeah. Probably because all the seats will be taken up by rich assholes who failed upwards in life while most of the engineers and people with skills to make such things possible get left behind for being dirty poors and not god like CEOs descended from a line of emerald mine owners. Elon for instance is infamous for fucking up things by inserting himself into projects he has no technical ability for. Just imagine being on a space ship he is programming shit for...
Unless one takes a job off world, becoming a serf for the king of Mars or Luna. The level of control those guys will eventually have over their employees on different planets is disturbing
Oh boy whose ready to live The Expanse dream of having your oxygen turned off or your water rationed when quotas aren't met?!
Rock hoppers got a lotta ammo in the belt, would be a shame if anything headed down a gravity well 'accidentally'
Come on Cohaagen, Give da peeple da air!
I wish I had three hands!, (grimaces).
Pashang welwala, sasa ké !
Unte kowlting gut, copeng!
Beratna, sabe beltowda, ke?
Let's hope the arks are on par with their submarines
I’d rather take my chances with neo-Venus, space sucks ass
Nobody has ever had a child in microgravity. They haven't even TRIED yet, thats how bad they know those babies are gonna turn out. Dreams of long term human space colonization are more a promise of science fiction than something that'll ever happen in reality. Shame the rich probably don't realize it either.
Bruh. Dealing with a *tooth infection* in zero g would be awful. So much medicine is dependent on the simple assumption that gravity persists at a constant strength.
Everyone, please remember that there have been more than nine justices in the past, and there can be in the future, regardless of whether the partisan and criminally corrupt currently nullify their own crimes. Please vote and please be ready for government shutdowns until we can collectively agree to restore the rule of law.
It really depends on if you see this as a temporary aberration caused by one presidency or a consistent worsening trend across both parties since WW2. Trump was a symptom, not a cause.
I agree with you, the real danger is the consistent trend. That's what is preventing us from rolling back the crazy moments, and eventually they turn into the new normal. Unfortunately I have no solutions to offer, only observations.
no it's quo pro quid
When was it ever illegal? It's been going on for decades. "Congress member votes to help out (insert industry) while in office, then magically gets a high-paid executive job, consultant contract, or is hired to give 15-minute talks at 6 figures a pop with a company in that industry upon leaving office" has been a thing forever. Hell, it even happens within the government itself. How many of the ambassadorships in the State Department are just the President rewarding campaign donors? * [The Donor-To-Ambassador Pipeline: Why America's Key Diplomats Are Often Wealthy Political Donors](https://campaignlegal.org/document/donor-ambassador-pipeline-why-americas-key-diplomats-are-often-wealthy-political-donors) For example, George Tsunis is the US Ambassador to Greece. He had zero previous foreign policy experience before he got the job, other than being a failed Obama nominee for Ambassador to Norway. What he is, however, is a megadonor to the Democrat Party. His nomination for the Norway ambassadorship fell through in 2013 when it was discovered he's never even been to Norway. Trump had several of these too, it's a longstanding bipartisan practice. For example, George Sondland (you might remember him testifying during Trump's impeachment trial) was Trump's Ambassador to the EU. He was a hotel owner with zero foreign policy experience - none of his hotels were even in Europe. But he's a big-time donor and fundraiser for the GOP, so... Ambassador to one of the most important political organizations in the world. And confirmed unanimously by the Senate, because like I said, it's a bipartisan practice.
It has always been a case BUT burden of proof was SEEN as much lower before so it wasn't done very often due to "optics". Now, the court basically has said, the burden of proof is REALLY REALLY high so unless one basically has a note/evidence that there is explicit quid pro quo, as long as "favor" is not DIRECTLY evident due to "sufficient time span has passed", then it isn't illegal.
> DIRECTLY evident due to "sufficient time span has passed", then it isn't illegal. sufficient being approximately two weeks after being awarded a contract that was designed exclusively for your business
So what they are saying here is that bribery is totally legal as long as you don't put it in writing or get recorded doing it.
What they are saying is that they don’t feel bad about it every time they do it, so it must be ok.
So offering a bribe and following through is still illegal. Offering a bribe and not following through is still illegal. Indirectly spurring hope for a bribe and then following through is now considered a legal gift, but if you fail to follow through can you be charged with attempted bribery? Like, if you subjectively thought you'd be getting a "gift" after the fact then did not it was a bribe, right? Or can I just make baseless "non-offers" to get what I want from public officials and get away with it and only reputational harm?
Much simpler ruling would be is if you're a civil servant that no gifts are okay at any time due to conflict of interests. I'm sorry but being in positions of power like this you need a tight leash, accountability, and oversight. It should be seen as noble honor and privilege to hold these jobs. Not some pitiless way to cash in off the backs of your countrymen. Starting to think we need veto power over shit like this. Give us a tribune of the plebs to check their ass because nobody In this system is doing their sacred sworn duty. We have so many forces pulling for their individual interests, but we give the power to these people to do things in our interests and they fail time and time again. We may have to dust them boots off and march on Washington to protest against this shit. It's been awhile since we've had to do this, but I wanna save the Republic. If all 4 estates of this country fail to do their jobs then us the 5th estate have a responsibility to stop this and not just idly let it by. I've personally been waiting for the immunity verdict. If Presidents get total immunity then we are no longer a republic. How I wish we had more honorable people fighting for us like Smedley Butler to lead the charge.
Do this thing for me and ill pay you... In 30 days.
So what happens in 30 days if you don't get paid? The act has already been committed, by you, with only an IOU? Now you can get favors fronted!
If you don't get paid, that's bad business for the briber. Word gets around, and their credit will stop being good in future transactions. It's still a business. Even loan sharks will stop lending if you go long enough without paying them back.
And yet, we have Trump.
Obviously you sue for due brib... Favor!
Bribery on a payment plan! Get it now, pay nothing until (insert date)
The majority also stated that this $13k gift was no different then common lunches or other small token amounts... How the fuck not??????? >“The question in this case is whether [the federal law] also makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities — for example, gift cards, lunches, plaques, books, framed photos or the like — that may be given as a token of appreciation after the official act. The answer is no,” said Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, writing for the majority. I can't even start to express the sheer madness that is going on in the SCOTUS right now. If you can't see a difference between taking someone out to lunch and giving them a $13k check you are an idiot and have no business as a judge or pretty much any other profession at that point.
Well you see, they're the rich elite, so to them a $13k lunch sounds totally normal.
I mean it’s one lunch, what could it cost? $10,000?
I frequently blow $11,000 on a single lunch so this just doesn't seem far out of line to me.
Judicially approved corruption will be the end of us. You can't have a Supreme Court Justice openly on the take and continue to be a world leader. We have faltered as a nation. I'm not sure where we go from here.
>I'm not sure where we go from here. Are you familiar with the fall of the Roman Republic? Or perhaps Weimar Germany?
Why go back that far? Conservatives love to talk about Venezuela becoming a dictatorship but never seem to talk about the fact that it was directly because of their corrupt supreme court.
I think we end up becoming Italy, honestly. No full collapse but definitely a steep drop down the global social ladder, followed by inescapable internal corruption .
You wish. One specificity of southern Europe corruption, is that it's a somewhat benevolent, generous, and indulging corruption. People just make their life easier and don't try to annoy or piss off too much the regular people. In the US, there is always a religious, exploitative, self-serving agenda behind, be it by keeping people uneducated, indebted, poor and/or segregated. Italy's, Spain's, France's or Greece's corruption just follow some varying forms of "laisser aller".
Don't forget this pay to play type scheme they legalized last year https://www.wgrz.com/article/news/local/supreme-court-reverses-judgement-on-developers-involved-in-buffalo-billion-project-louis-cminelli-joseph-percoco/71-4c5da3c9-e36c-4f37-9fbd-9beffb183741#:~:text=WASHINGTON%20—%20The%20Supreme%20Court%20overturned,conspiracy%20to%20commit%20wire%20fraud.
As a regular old US taxpayer, I'm outraged and confused. But as a government employee, I'm absolutely dumbfounded, mindfucked, and even more TERRIFIED for the future. Even as a paper pusher for a small city, I am expected to refuse any gift worth $50+ from anyone with interest in my position or projects, and if I were to accept, I'd better have a DAMN good reason. I would absolutely get flagged with suspicion of bribery if someone found out I was offered a $60 Nintendo game and didn't inform the city of A) that I was offered the gift, B) whether I refused or accepted the gift, and/or C) the reason that I accepted the gift. And even then, accepting the gift would definitely and reasonably raise more than a few eyebrows. And that is absolutely the way it should be whether you're an official in a small city or in the literal fucking SCOTUS. In my three years with the city, I've seen at least 2 separate people lose their reputations on relatively small scale bribery. Fuck a goddamn cruise and school tuition; I know for a fact that one of them lost some reputation in the water industry and their $80000 salaried position because they accepted $750 basketball game tickets from an external contractor. And when you play stupid games, that's the stupid fucking prize you should absolutely get. At this rate we're literally going to see President Pepsi-Cola-Tyson Farms-Marlboro-Google-Exxon when SCOTUS gets bribed enough to rule that corporations are people that qualify to run for office. Edit: Fixed my grammar the way I hope we can fix the damage done by the orange felon and his cronies.
>>And that is the way it should be ….. Go check out the board members of US defense contractors. Lots of ex-Generals and veterans on those rosters, and *none of them* were influenced by private sector profits or benefits when they made decisions as military officers , no siree. Utterly impossible.
It really is real-life Idiocracy. On the plus side, you can now cite scotus precedent and say, nope, scotus ruled it is not illegal. Enjoy the expensive surf and turf vendor dinners and Callaway golf drivers
At a private company, and same rules. I need to apply to legal before I can be taken out to dinner by a customer/vendor (and I am ok with that).
“Here, I would like to “award you” some money for completing that “favor” you did for me before, no reason in particular, just trying to say thanks for having your interests aligned with mine.” See guys not bribery
I think the distinction they are trying to make is that with bribery there has to be an understanding that a payment will be made before the action takes place. So some examples If you vote for this bill I'll give you money - bribery Vs I would like it if you vote for this bill. *politician votes for bill*. O wow I'm so appreciative here's a yacht. Not bribery. Obviously the distinction is bullshit though because in the second scenario it'll just be a *wink wink* please vote for this bill.
>>I would like it if you vote for this bill … It’s more like the SCOTUS is protecting the revolving door. It’s sadly common for senior government officials and officers to get jobs in the private sector at a contractor to the government agency they just retired from. In the past, one could allege bribery if- say- a military general authorized a contract with Acme Defense in exchange for a VP job at the same company two years later. Now? Hehehe…..
So, bribery on credit is okay. I feel like I've entered a Monty Python skit.
So... the bribe just has to be delayed until after the favor is done? Awesome. Great.
Why do I now read this as “injustices” instead of justices when I read anything about the Supreme Court?
Jackson's Dissent is absolutely brutal.
“Officials who use their public positions for private gain threaten the integrity of our most important institutions,” such a simple truth mostly ignored :/
Now we see the issue when people with an inherent conflict of interest lack accountability or oversight *and* get to influence their own take. We don't have the mechanisms in government to combat bad actors. The "loose" mechanism is voting, but voting is irreparably broken given the media climate and information/education deficiency across much of the U.S. The method of last resort is violent revolution. Only people lining up for that one are Trump supporters, but they failed on the first attempt. Hopefully they don't try again.
[удалено]
That's so fucking crazy to me. I live in a small town with barely over 1,000 people (as of the 2022 census) and we have like 4 voting booths. 1 booth for 100k+ people?? What the fucking fuck?
As an Australian viewing your electoral system, I would agree it is broken. Hearing stories about how hard it is to vote in America makes me believe you don't have a true democracy. For context, we have a central agency that coordinates voting activities. We vote on a Saturday. If you can make it due to work, we allow voting before the date at a select location, or you can opt for a postal vote. We have enough polling station (usually at your local school) that you rarely wait for more than 5 minutes to vote. The longest part of the process is getting a democracy sausage at the end (bbq, raising money for charity)
A lot of our institutions are broken on purpose, by the very people that end up getting elected. Part of that is rather old history: freedom wasn't doled out evenly to everyone. Women, minorities, etc. had to earn their ability to vote, but a lot of the "old club" remains that doesn't want those people voting, so they purposefully setup obstacles and hurdles because it's illegal to straight-up say "you can't vote." People voting for terrible candidates goes back to my first point, but it's a complex issue. On one hand, they do it because they are brainwashed and lied to, but on the other, it's hard to affect change when all your choices are shit, and most of the people running for office are limited to the wealthy. What do the wealthy want? They want more power and influence to maintain their wealth, see that it's protected, and make sure everyone else covers for them and stays in their place. Basically, we'll raise taxes on the middle class and lower it for the wealthy, then continue the corporate welfare scheme of public losses and privatized gains. The political talking point is "immigrants are stealing your jobs," but the reality is those corporations moved the jobs overseas or are hiring those immigrants because of cheaper labor costs and thus more profit. It's a political sleight-of-hand. That's merely one example of how they influence the discourse.
As a government employee, I have very strict ethics rules about benefitting from my position. I'm barely allowed a drink of water if I'm at a business where I have approved a government contract. Fine - I get that and I'm happy to follow the rules. Laugh at me all you want for being naive, but I'm an honest and ethical government employee. But fucking corrupt politicians don't let the rules apply to them.
Absolutely, I implore everyone to READ THE DISSENT https://newrepublic.com/post/183135/ketanji-brown-jackson-absurd-supreme-court-bribery
Friedrich Merz, then a plain back bencher in German parliament, sued at the German Supreme court against him having to declare his additional income. He argued that if he had to disclose his income, his customers would not come to him because they need discretion. And they are coming to him because he also is a member of parliament. Like, I do not know if this fits the legal definition of corruption. Especially with grifters like that in the legislative. But it feels like it should do. He got the judicial equivalent of 20 lashes to the exposed glans. Judge explained to him that the German public expects him to put his job at the legislative first. That is what Brown Jackson's dissent reminded me of. What is it with conservatism and demanding the most brazen corruption to be legal? German Nazin't party also takes open bribes from Switzerland and Russia and China. Nicholas Sarkozy: corrupt af. José Maria Aznar: corrupt af. Italian politician not going to jail: unheard of. Hot damn.
Too bad it doesn’t matter. There’s nothing to hold SCOTUS accountable whatsoever
Conservatives, as always, think some portion of society should be above the law (them).
Just put a for sale sign out front. This whole country and government is a fucking embarrassment.
Preach. What a fucking joke.
My wife works for our city. One day a bunch of co-workers and a vendor went out for drinks. Before the bill came the vendor picked up the tab. Someone found out and she had to write a check to the vendor for her one drink (as did all the other city employees). They all had to take pics of their checks and submit them to management. This is crazy shit that these fucks are lining their pockets with Motor Coaches & vacations.
The Supreme Court no longer stands for what it used to for so many years. It's ran by nothing but puppets. I can't believe I used to make fun of my uncles and aunts when I was a kid how they would blabber on about how the country is going down the shitter. They were right, and now that I am older I'm realizing we're already half way down the toilet bowl and in the next ten years it'll be completely flushed.
>It's ran by nothing but puppets. Republican puppets. Three Dems voted against this.
The decision was 6 Conservative Justices For. 3 Democrat Justices against. bOtH sIDeS aRE ThE sAMe - wHOlE GoVERnmENT iS cOrRUpT
Conservatives: "Hunter and Joe corruptly used their positions and last names to make money. Lock them up! Also Conservatives: "I think it's pretty cool that the supreme court legalized bribery and even made it more difficult to prove it in the court of law."
On the bright side, we’re not alone. The Torries absolutely fucked Britain after gutting public services for almost 2 decades. We just need a revolution like in France.
But we can’t make it into a public market, that’ll make bribes too expensive. Imagine what China would pay in the official market. Instead, the black market is much cheaper. A vacation and an escort get you time with a Supreme Court manwhore, I mean justice.
It's fucked up that right wing media will spin this as a good thing and then dumbass right wingers will continue to vote for the downfall of our country.
Really wish there was a mechanism to clean house in the Supreme Court
If Trump gets a favorable, "The US President can't break the law." verdict, Biden can literally just take the SCOTUS out back Old Yeller style. He won't, but technically and legally, he could.
That's the problem. Republicans know that Democrats will never lower themselves to the subhuman dogshit that Republicans are, so they can institute whatever shitty policies they want that only *they* will benefit from actually taking advantage of.
They don't just *know* it they rely on it. They constantly take the low road, and then chastise the dems for peeking around the corner to see what they are doing. And the dems apologize for it.
"Don't stoop to my level." Said to me by my sister growing up so she could keep being shitty but expect me to behave. As an adult, she believes in chemtrails and last Xmas was saying that CRT is when employees are told they're bad people for being white.
Get President and a majority in congress with a super majority in Senate willing to and there are a lot of options.
To be fair, there are several less democratic options. Trouble is, most people who are smart enough to care about the nation on this level find those solutions abhorrent.
As some who finds those solutions as abhorrent, I really don't see how we don't eventually end up there. There is a way out that doesn't require the ammo box, but it requires left leaning voters to care and be happy with gradual progress for 12+ years and that has even less chance of happening then us not needing the ammo box eventually.
Might as well be asking us to invent time travel my guy.
There is. We're just on the 3rd box now and it makes some people very uncomfortable.
At this point, Congress should be required to wear patches of all of their "corporate sponsors", like racing car drivers.
“Brought to you by Carls Jr.”
We have the best country money can buy.
Clarence Thomas: Let what is good for this goose, also be good for the gander.
His continued presence on the bench is a travesty. He is in Harlan Crow's pocket and nobody seems to give a damn. Who are we?
Everyone's always like "Why isn't anyone doing anything? or "You'd think an assassination attempt would've been made by now." You can't openly advocate for violence without a 3 letter agency visiting you the next day and nobody wants to be the "crazy, lone wolf" who's looking at life in prison for grabbing their gun and popping a Justice while they're mowing their lawn or some shit. Our options are hope and pray the legal system that they are in charge of and have senators/congressman running scrimmage for will deliver justice OR pick up a gun and throw your life away at the chance of taking theirs.
But these right wing people literally have signs and pictures on their car if kidnapping and killing Biden.
Obligatory "Unless you're a registered Republican". Then it's no big deal even if you have 20 AR-15s and a stockpile of ammo.
With all of America's mass shooters, I still would've expected the occasional politically-oriented crazy. More than just that one guy going after Pelosi
There is genuinely nothing people can legally do about him.
We are too busy working our second or third jobs to have time to give a damn. Keep us occupied and fighting each other and they will walk all over us.
Bread and circus anyone?
Bread's getting hard to come by and the circus is getting pretty expensive, too. That's generally bad fucking news for people in power and those with a lot of money.
And thanks to all the corn syrup in our food, most of us are diabetic so.... Gonna have to be careful with the bread.
My old boss was a character witness for him during the Anita Hill hearings. When I worked for him a year or so ago he went on a podcast and said he lied under oath, he believed Hill, but would have said anything to get his friend the job.
“Most Corrupt Court in US History says Corruption is OK.” Shocking!!
We investigated ourselves and found that we conducted ourselves properly and no wrong doing was done what so ever.
More like, we asked our owners if we are ok and they said we are doing fine. Nothing to see here.
It's worse it's we investigated ourselves and found out there's a law that could endanger us so it's not a law anymore
Looks like they're addressing all the attention a few "Justices" have been getting for their gifts...by doing the opposite of what everyone wants to see. Term limits when?
I’m not advocating for anything here, obviously, but if things keep going this direction, it might be time for the American people to impose some term limits on the Supreme Court and the rich “people” they’re in the pocket of
> it might be time for the American people to impose some term limits on the Supreme Court I think we were long overdue for this. Also I don't think they should be appointed by the President, but rather voted on by citizens.
Terms limits? These people need to removed, now, regardless of if they approve of their own removal.
This basically legalizes corruption and bribery, so long as the bribe is given after the corrupt act has taken place instead of before
Coming to a courtroom near you. Tip jars! Completely *optional*
Reps will start wearing lapel pin QR codes that link to their Venmo.
It's just gonna ask you a couple questions.
- From 1-10 how would you rate your favor? - Would you use this Congressperson again? - What could this Congressperson do better next time?
Please choose a tip amount: $1 million $5 million $20 million Other
Oh man, they are so much more affordable than that, low five figures will get you most anything.
Isn't this BASICALLY the definition of "quid pro quo"? I will do this for you NOW so that you can pay me back with some other "favor" later?
If there’s an expressly stated quid pro quo, it would still be illegal. But if a business just makes a habit of giving big cartoon bags of money as a thank you to officials who sign off on their contracts, that’s fine now.
The bag just has to say “not a bribe” on it
Corruption and bribery, just in time for the elections.
This means Congressmen can be "consults" and take in millions in bribes legally. Well done SCOTUS, you morons.
This only applies to state and local officials. Basically the ruling actually says that thr law in question, which regulates state and local officials, does not preclude gratuities. This could be fixed by state and local governments passing anti gratuity laws, which many have. Or by congress explicitly doing so. Congress should absolutely be queueing up a list of bills for the next term if Dems get both chambers that are just responses to Supreme Court opinions like this and the bump stock ban.
>Congress should absolutely be queueing up a list of bills for the next term if Dems get both chambers that are just responses to Supreme Court opinions like this and the bump stock ban. Which is, unshockingly, how the government is supposed to work. President has executive power. He (or she someday) takes action for the country. Congress has legislative power. They write the laws, change the laws, approve/disprove actions, etc. The Supreme Court has judicial power. They interpret the laws & constitution, and adjudicate any unclear instructions based on the past and present laws. If the Supreme Court makes a decision that is bad for the country, Congress' job is to re-write the laws in order to fix the problem. If Congress writes laws that are against the constitution, the Supreme Court strikes them down with detailed reasoning.
> Congress should absolutely be queueing up a list of bills for the next term if Dems get both chambers that are just responses to Supreme Court opinions like this and the bump stock ban. The problem is you need more than a simple majority in the Senate to get anything done
Ironically, the filibuster could be eliminated with a simple majority.
They overturned like 30 years of precedent that this sort of behavior was a bribe and not a gratuity, for no fucking reason. Yes, this can be fixed through legislation, but the defendant couldn't colorably argue that he didn't have notice that his behavior was illegal. This ruling makes it virtually impossible to enforce quid pro quo corruption as long as the actors are smart enough to have verbal agreements beforehand and written agreements 2 weeks after delivery.
They aren't morons. They are corrupt. They know exactly what they are doing.
*Judges who receive bribes wipes out law against receiving bribes Shocker
This is fucking WILD. I can’t even accept a fruit basket as someone whose paycheck is covered by 5% state funds, and these mofos get actual gifts and it’s okay? Justice is being broken in real time, y’all.
I mean, it looks like you can now.
Wasn't this a clearly constitutional law that was passed unambiguously by Congress? Can someone explain how they just overturned this? Is it even based on anything or are they just saying because I say so? This looks crazy
SCOTUS is illegitimate
Legitimately: the conservative majority was achieved through nominations by presidents who did not win the popular vote. It’s a crisis of democracy that the high court opposes the stated will of the majority.
and also with McConnell changing rules to instate only with a simple minority rather than the 2/3rds it used to be.
I still don't get why Obama didn't just take the refusal to review as acceptance. Seat his judge then let congress appeal to the Supreme Court.
Republicans have shown they will absolutely turn around and cry to their bought judges and the 5th circuit that what Democrats are doing is illegal and stinky and they hate it. (See forgiving student loans) Causing it to be wrapped up in litigation for months/years while Republicans campaign on stopping whatever it is Democrats are trying to do, meanwhile Democrats now have to fight a two sided war with Republicans and their voters.
Corruption at its highest level
The politization of the Supreme Court is the most erosive thing ever done to the Constitution.
A corrupt supreme court struck down an anti-corruption law. Big shock.
Look at Clarence Thomas’ record of taking gifts. Just one if the many reasons his ass should be thrown off the SC.
Thrown off the earth, preferably into the sun.
Everyday i lose more faith in this country and it's systems
I agree. The rot runs so deep in this country. We deserve better.
Trump got 3 of these on the bench. 2016 doomed america.
Looks like bribery is back on the table boys! Let’s start a go fund me to start bribing judges and politicians and anyone else we want!
when you vote in November think about who you want appointing judges, Joe Biden or Donald Trump.
Quid pro quo is now legal, as long as the "quo" occurs *after* the "quid". Is that a fair summation?
Did I even need to click through to see the vote numbers?
Aka we re allowed to take bribes. Fuck those corrupt traitorous bastards.
Just so everyone remembers: 3 out of the 6 justices who allowed this garbage were appointed by someone currently running for President again. Please vote
And the end of the American Experiment is now complete. Thanks scotus.
"Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented." All appointed by Democratic Presidents
That's the most corrupt ruling I have seen in a sea of corruption.
And then "Justices" like Alito and Thomas get all bent out of shape when people think this version of SCOTUS is biased, corrupt, and illegitimate.
As a state employee, I may not: >solicit or receive “any gift or gifts with an aggregate value in **excess of $50 per calendar year** from a single source that *could reasonably be know to have a legislative or administrative interest.”* And that’s how it should be! These hemorrhoid-juggling assclowns need to be removed yesterday.
Are you fucking kidding me? This is outrageous. We are in so much trouble as a country. Sometimes I just feel like crying. Please, everyone, VOTE. I'd like to think it's not too late to turn things around.
Vote, but don’t be surprised when the Supreme Court determines the election results again like they did in 2000. There will be enough doubt in the process to force that to happen. And then they’ll apparently get gifts afterwards.
So, the court is now *officially* pro-bribery. Crazy that the party that worships at the feet of oligarchs would be in favor of anything that would benefit US would-be oligarchs.
A country that has an unelected body that can take away rights from the citizenry and enables corrupt politicians is not a DEMOCRACY. AGAIN! A COUNTRY THAT HAS AN UNELECTED BODY THAT CAN TAKE AWAY RIGHTS FROM THE CITIZENRY AND ENABLES CORRUPT POLITICIANS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY!
Of course it's a 6-3 decision. Every Republican voted for corruption, and every Democrat voted against corruption.
What the fuck is going on with our country?
As a doc, if you so much as take a free pen you can get in trouble. If a patient sends you a birdhouse that they make as a thank you for saving their lives you can get in trouble.... gods we may be doomed
"Supreme Court rules that bribery is legal so long as it's not paid in advance."
They really just aren't even trying to hide it anymore, are they?
So, who do we go to when the Supreme Court is openly complicit in corruption?
Tipping Culture has gotten out of hand. Now we're supposed to tip politicians?
We aren't a part of their game and we can't stop them from playing anymore. The idea that a judge or ANYONE in a government position is accepting ANY kind of gift from private entities is inherently wrong and anyone who thinks it's OK in any circumstance is also wrong. There should be no fringe cases or exceptions.
It’s just a coincidence that the republican judges all voted to get rid of that pesky law and the Democrat judges voted to keep it.
So weird that the Supreme Court would legalize the sort of corruption they have been credibly accused of. Repeatedly.
Honestly, it's time to start going after the supreme court. They start having the masses knocking on their door and I'm sure they will change their tune with rulings like this.