Edward R. Murrow once said, "No one can terrorize a whole nation, unless we are his accomplices." He added, ‘A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.’”
Justice Jackson will not be an accomplice. And we must not be sheep.
28 U.S. Code § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge
(a)Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
It perplexes me when we take the one who stuck her neck out and got bashed for it in a power move by a fellow female (white) justice, one who has potentially put her life on the line already--but that's not enough. We want more from her? Must we keep wanting more? So Much, and Never Enough.
Other than that, I appreciate your post on the Code of Conduct--but not the suggestion that one of the greatest Supreme Court justice's of our time is not being ethical enough. Survival and morality are always in conflict with each other.
IMHO the 3 Dems have been complicit for participating in the insurrectioin.
She has not put her life on the line at all. I felt the same about the lawyers who failed to file affidavits of bias re Cannon et al, when they had personal knowledge.
Judge Soloman, I ask you to recall the insurrection at the capital and trumps pardoning of those people...they are out there. they know what trump wants them to do. Anyone who tries to act against trump gets many death threats. I have no doubt had the crowd found mike pence that day, they would have hanged him and TRUMP DID NOT CARE.
She's being vilified on the right, which puts a target on her back. I don't disagree with your highlighting of the moral issues, and thank you for that. Its just, if we pound on the other side and pound on our side too, we'll be left with the other side calling the shots. Fascist authoritarian types at least appear strong.
So you think the Trump JD is going to toss Thomas in jail for violating the ethics code, when he votes in favor of Trump in every single case? And when they don’t, that’s somehow Justice Jackson’s fault?
Those of us who lived in a fishbowl had the same obligation to come forward. At every other level except SCOTUS, judicial ethics investigations are hell on wheels. E.G. Even Trump's sister, Maryanne, resigned rather than face one.
In most federal courts, besides the rules, peer pressure is on the side of full disclosure.
I find it interesting that Justice Jackson is the only justice who is actually speaking out against the lawlessness of the other justices on the court, and yet you're coming down hard on her for it. Why not go after one of the "conservative" justices, who would be more effective at reining in their peers? Why not Roberts?
thomas is a long time KNOWN offender,way long before Jackson was on the sup crt, and I think we all remember alitoes flags on BOTH of his houses...point: we all know they should go.
Watch mainstream news, and notice just how far it has descended into the untrustworthy abyss, afraid to ruffle feathers, although it is the one acting "chicken."
Justice Jackson may not be an "accomplice", but she's also no hero despite Jen's efforts in the BS department. In two cases listed (CASA and AFGE) Justice Jackson clearly missed the issue upon which SCOTUS ultimately decided. Of course, Jen would not include any part of the majority opinions or Justice Sotomayor's concurring opinion in one case:
"I agree with JUSTICE JACKSON that the President cannot restructure federal agencies in a manner inconsistent with congressional mandates. See post, at 13. Here, however, the relevant Executive Order directs agencies to plan reorganizations and reductions in force “consistent with applicable law,” App. to Application for Stay 2a, and the resulting joint memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and Office of Personnel Management reiterates as much. The plans themselves are not before this Court, at this stage, and we thus have no occasion to consider whether they can and will be carried out consistent with the constraints of law."
I blame this entire mess on Mitch McConnell, because the hypocritical old bastard stole two SCOTUS seats. I wish Obama had told the Senate, "Garland's my guy, he starts work tomorrow, and if you don't like it, do something about it." Would that have been any worse than McConnell refusing to vote on Garland's appointment? I also wish that RBG, as iconic as she was, had realized that when she had cancer, it was probably a good time to step down and allow herself to be replaced with another liberal judge. And finally, two weeks before Trump's term was over, McConnell rammed through another appointment, going completely against the reasoning he gave Obama, who still had 11 months in office. If SCOTUS is 6-3 liberal, or even 5-4 liberal, instead of the other way around, Trump would be living at Mar-A-Lardo with a leg bracelet on, or maybe he would have fled the country. He damn sure wouldn't be president. And the USA wouldn't be headed off a cliff, the laughingstock of the free world. A lot of people are going to suffer bad endings, especially in the eyes of history, over this period in our country. Because, despite all the obstacles, DEMOCRACY WILL WIN. I wouldn't be a damn Contrarian if I didn't believe that.
Mitch McConnell is fully responsible for this current mess. He and his Republican Senators were given the opportunity to oust Trump -- twice. The House of Representatives presented him with legitimate proceedings of impeachment. He and his "boys" failed to convict and remove, instead providing the nation with a kabuki-theater "trial".
McConnells pat answer to all of this. "They will get over it". Sounds like "Let them eat cake", and the implications are much worse. The current disregard of the rule of law, by the current President and administration is unprecedented and we are in the midst of a fascist takeover of our government. One wonders if the 2026 elections will be the answer, or if by that time we have no democracy left to defend.
Of course Moscow Mitch is responsible - and he's proud of that. He made it clear he would work against ANYTHING coming from a Democratic White House, and he did.
"I wish Obama had told the Senate, "Garland's my guy, he starts work tomorrow, and if you don't like it, do something about it." Would that have been any worse than McConnell refusing to vote on Garland's appointment?"
Well sure, if you believe Obama can ignore the Constitution. McConnell's refusal to have a confirmation hearing was not against the Constitution. And that would apply to any Presidential nominee for any post that requires Senate confirmation. At some point this same scenario will play out with a Republican President and a Democrat-controlled Senate. It will be interesting to see the Repubs' reaction as the Dems play the same game.
You're right, but at least it would have been a drastic move to try and force the old bandit to budge. More than anyone else in Washington, he's to blame for the sorry state of our country.
"You're right, but at least it would have been a drastic move to try and force the old bandit to budge."
Obama would have been impeached for that. Maybe not convicted in the Senate, but still...
"More than anyone else in Washington, he's to blame for the sorry state of our country."
I've got a laundry list of people and events that have moved our country away from it's republican/Constitutional roots. And from what I see, neither the Dems nor the Repubs care one bit about it. Their only shared concern is about power - how to acquire, maintain, and expand it.
I am so glad she was chosen as this week's Undaunted! She is absolutely fearless and CLEARLY on the side of democracy, unlike some other members of the SCOTUS.
The sad truth is that the United States, as a nation of laws, died last year with this court's decision in the aptly named Trump v US. There, as in the cases highlighted here, the right-wing majority created a doctrine of absolute immunity for Donald Trump without the slightest legal or historical support. The horrific decisions we have seen from the court more recently are just poisonous icing on that cake.
It is incumbent upon all of us to support Justice Jackson and others who are standing firm against the damage being done by the partisan hacks now controlling the court. This includes taking would-be enablers to task. As an example, yesterday the NYT described birthright citizenship as a "custom." When supposedly informed media sources downgrade explicitly protected Constitutional rights to mere customs, and treat their abrogation as business-as-usual, we all have a duty to speak up.
What I can't figure out is Chief Justice Roberts. The others, including the riff-raff appointed by Trump -- well, that's another story. Compromised from the get-go (and not one of them recused themselves as they should have done).
But Roberts? He predates this. What does he get from overseeing the United States's transformation into a kingdom run by a demented maniac without any guardrails. He can see what the Republican Party has become. It's a mystery to me.
Love the article. It is great to see Ms. Brown standing up for the people. In my opinion, the other justices are not for the people. They prefer to give in to Trumpism. The Justices were hired to do a job, part of the checks and balances of authority, yet they prefer to give in to Trump's insane wants. Is it fear of being removed from these positions? If fear is the case, then mentally speaking, they are unfit for the job.
Thank you for highlighting Justice KBJ and including her opinions. It was shocking that the other 2 "liberal" justices sided with the majority. Treating this regime as "normal" is the major mistake this court is making. However, given the current fascist coup which has happened and which we the people will continue working to overcome her dissents create light enough to see more clearly not just what the implications of their decisions are for today, but reveal the many trajectories and groups which have led to the current fascist regime. Overturning this regime and the movement spawned several generations ago rooted in white supremacy," christian" nationalism, and concentrated wealth will be the order of the day for years to come...IF we the people really want a democracy where all means all.
She is a true justice. Her book gave a great deal of insight to what has molded her approach to her role as a Supreme Court Justice. Her ability to articulate what needs to be stated is exceptional!
The most crucial test of the Supreme Court’s level of corruption will be if and when it takes on the question of Trump’s ban on birthright citizenship. If it sides with Trump on this issue it will be saying that both the President and the Supreme Court have the power to rewrite the constitution by nullifying one of its amendments. At that point democracy and the rule of law are both dead letters. Frankly, the Supreme Court has become a kangaroo court dominated by conservative toadies for whom I have nothing but Supreme Contempt.
It is unfortunate that we don't have more sitting Justices on what purports to be the Supreme Court. With the current majority, the Court has become far less independent and much more supportive of a president's orders that in the face of other Courts would have been seen as illegal. What we currently have is a majority who no longer look to serve the good of the people.
Trump & MAGA will likely get the opportunity to replace Alito and Thomas with younger versions of those extremists. Dems should be planning containment strategies.
Edward R. Murrow once said, "No one can terrorize a whole nation, unless we are his accomplices." He added, ‘A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.’”
Justice Jackson will not be an accomplice. And we must not be sheep.
If she has first hand knowledge about Thomas and Alito, she violates her oath by not bringing charges against them. https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/Code-of-Conduct-for-Justices_November_13_2023.pdf
28 U.S. Code § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge
(a)Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
That"shall" sounds mandatory.
It perplexes me when we take the one who stuck her neck out and got bashed for it in a power move by a fellow female (white) justice, one who has potentially put her life on the line already--but that's not enough. We want more from her? Must we keep wanting more? So Much, and Never Enough.
Other than that, I appreciate your post on the Code of Conduct--but not the suggestion that one of the greatest Supreme Court justice's of our time is not being ethical enough. Survival and morality are always in conflict with each other.
IMHO the 3 Dems have been complicit for participating in the insurrectioin.
She has not put her life on the line at all. I felt the same about the lawyers who failed to file affidavits of bias re Cannon et al, when they had personal knowledge.
anyone who opposes trump puts their life on the line...
Judge Soloman, I ask you to recall the insurrection at the capital and trumps pardoning of those people...they are out there. they know what trump wants them to do. Anyone who tries to act against trump gets many death threats. I have no doubt had the crowd found mike pence that day, they would have hanged him and TRUMP DID NOT CARE.
She's being vilified on the right, which puts a target on her back. I don't disagree with your highlighting of the moral issues, and thank you for that. Its just, if we pound on the other side and pound on our side too, we'll be left with the other side calling the shots. Fascist authoritarian types at least appear strong.
I remember absolutist purer-than-thou I'm.a.genius.you're.all.culls types from half a century back during the Vietnam War protests.
EVERY DANG one of them went on to become a GOP yuppie.
Is there a clause in there somewhere that states a justice can have another justice arrested for violating this code of conduct? If so, I missed it.
No. But Thomas has been refrred toi the Judicial Conference, which can ask JD.
So you think the Trump JD is going to toss Thomas in jail for violating the ethics code, when he votes in favor of Trump in every single case? And when they don’t, that’s somehow Justice Jackson’s fault?
I don't have any hope they'd do anything.
Those of us who lived in a fishbowl had the same obligation to come forward. At every other level except SCOTUS, judicial ethics investigations are hell on wheels. E.G. Even Trump's sister, Maryanne, resigned rather than face one.
In most federal courts, besides the rules, peer pressure is on the side of full disclosure.
I find it interesting that Justice Jackson is the only justice who is actually speaking out against the lawlessness of the other justices on the court, and yet you're coming down hard on her for it. Why not go after one of the "conservative" justices, who would be more effective at reining in their peers? Why not Roberts?
It’s not Justice Jackson’s job to do what you suggest she should. It’s her job to dissent when she sees fit — as she has done.
Baloney -- we used to have ethics training once a year-- the duty is to come forward. Documented in the Judicial Conference.
There is an equivalent for lawyers. A duty of "candor."
The removal of a judge in the 11th Cir was generated by one of his bretheren.
I have never heard of a Supreme Court Associate Justice "turning in" a senior Justice. Have you?
roberts is in charge
thomas is a long time KNOWN offender,way long before Jackson was on the sup crt, and I think we all remember alitoes flags on BOTH of his houses...point: we all know they should go.
can't help but wonder why you call out a black female NEW TO THE COURT and no one else....
Rule didn't apply until Roberts' order.
you have an answer for everything don't you...
This is ridiculous, Daniel. Join the real world.
Anyone of them could be said to be violating their oaths... just saying
lets remember roberts, WHO IS THE CHIEF JUSTICE, knows about thomas and toes...
Watch mainstream news, and notice just how far it has descended into the untrustworthy abyss, afraid to ruffle feathers, although it is the one acting "chicken."
"Justice Jackson will not be an accomplice."
Justice Jackson may not be an "accomplice", but she's also no hero despite Jen's efforts in the BS department. In two cases listed (CASA and AFGE) Justice Jackson clearly missed the issue upon which SCOTUS ultimately decided. Of course, Jen would not include any part of the majority opinions or Justice Sotomayor's concurring opinion in one case:
"I agree with JUSTICE JACKSON that the President cannot restructure federal agencies in a manner inconsistent with congressional mandates. See post, at 13. Here, however, the relevant Executive Order directs agencies to plan reorganizations and reductions in force “consistent with applicable law,” App. to Application for Stay 2a, and the resulting joint memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and Office of Personnel Management reiterates as much. The plans themselves are not before this Court, at this stage, and we thus have no occasion to consider whether they can and will be carried out consistent with the constraints of law."
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25993251-24a1174-order/
"And we must not be sheep."
The Left needs to take a long hard look in the mirror when referring to "sheep".
I blame this entire mess on Mitch McConnell, because the hypocritical old bastard stole two SCOTUS seats. I wish Obama had told the Senate, "Garland's my guy, he starts work tomorrow, and if you don't like it, do something about it." Would that have been any worse than McConnell refusing to vote on Garland's appointment? I also wish that RBG, as iconic as she was, had realized that when she had cancer, it was probably a good time to step down and allow herself to be replaced with another liberal judge. And finally, two weeks before Trump's term was over, McConnell rammed through another appointment, going completely against the reasoning he gave Obama, who still had 11 months in office. If SCOTUS is 6-3 liberal, or even 5-4 liberal, instead of the other way around, Trump would be living at Mar-A-Lardo with a leg bracelet on, or maybe he would have fled the country. He damn sure wouldn't be president. And the USA wouldn't be headed off a cliff, the laughingstock of the free world. A lot of people are going to suffer bad endings, especially in the eyes of history, over this period in our country. Because, despite all the obstacles, DEMOCRACY WILL WIN. I wouldn't be a damn Contrarian if I didn't believe that.
Mitch McConnell is fully responsible for this current mess. He and his Republican Senators were given the opportunity to oust Trump -- twice. The House of Representatives presented him with legitimate proceedings of impeachment. He and his "boys" failed to convict and remove, instead providing the nation with a kabuki-theater "trial".
McConnells pat answer to all of this. "They will get over it". Sounds like "Let them eat cake", and the implications are much worse. The current disregard of the rule of law, by the current President and administration is unprecedented and we are in the midst of a fascist takeover of our government. One wonders if the 2026 elections will be the answer, or if by that time we have no democracy left to defend.
That election is already being rigged, and may not take place anyway. I'd suggest we are no longer just "in the midst" .
Of course Moscow Mitch is responsible - and he's proud of that. He made it clear he would work against ANYTHING coming from a Democratic White House, and he did.
Exactly!
Yes, for a multitude of offenses, he belongs behind bars, not behind the Resolute Desk.
"I wish Obama had told the Senate, "Garland's my guy, he starts work tomorrow, and if you don't like it, do something about it." Would that have been any worse than McConnell refusing to vote on Garland's appointment?"
Well sure, if you believe Obama can ignore the Constitution. McConnell's refusal to have a confirmation hearing was not against the Constitution. And that would apply to any Presidential nominee for any post that requires Senate confirmation. At some point this same scenario will play out with a Republican President and a Democrat-controlled Senate. It will be interesting to see the Repubs' reaction as the Dems play the same game.
You're right, but at least it would have been a drastic move to try and force the old bandit to budge. More than anyone else in Washington, he's to blame for the sorry state of our country.
"You're right, but at least it would have been a drastic move to try and force the old bandit to budge."
Obama would have been impeached for that. Maybe not convicted in the Senate, but still...
"More than anyone else in Washington, he's to blame for the sorry state of our country."
I've got a laundry list of people and events that have moved our country away from it's republican/Constitutional roots. And from what I see, neither the Dems nor the Repubs care one bit about it. Their only shared concern is about power - how to acquire, maintain, and expand it.
Justice Jackson is for the ages, a defender of the rule of law for every person, not just a self-selected few.
Thurgood Marshall must be looking down on her from above, smiling. :)
Ms. Jackson is definitely amazing.
I am so glad she was chosen as this week's Undaunted! She is absolutely fearless and CLEARLY on the side of democracy, unlike some other members of the SCOTUS.
The sad truth is that the United States, as a nation of laws, died last year with this court's decision in the aptly named Trump v US. There, as in the cases highlighted here, the right-wing majority created a doctrine of absolute immunity for Donald Trump without the slightest legal or historical support. The horrific decisions we have seen from the court more recently are just poisonous icing on that cake.
It is incumbent upon all of us to support Justice Jackson and others who are standing firm against the damage being done by the partisan hacks now controlling the court. This includes taking would-be enablers to task. As an example, yesterday the NYT described birthright citizenship as a "custom." When supposedly informed media sources downgrade explicitly protected Constitutional rights to mere customs, and treat their abrogation as business-as-usual, we all have a duty to speak up.
Every day is "Trump v US." inside the courts and everywhere in the country.
What I can't figure out is Chief Justice Roberts. The others, including the riff-raff appointed by Trump -- well, that's another story. Compromised from the get-go (and not one of them recused themselves as they should have done).
But Roberts? He predates this. What does he get from overseeing the United States's transformation into a kingdom run by a demented maniac without any guardrails. He can see what the Republican Party has become. It's a mystery to me.
If anyone deserves a Nobel prize right now, it’s KBJ.
Love the article. It is great to see Ms. Brown standing up for the people. In my opinion, the other justices are not for the people. They prefer to give in to Trumpism. The Justices were hired to do a job, part of the checks and balances of authority, yet they prefer to give in to Trump's insane wants. Is it fear of being removed from these positions? If fear is the case, then mentally speaking, they are unfit for the job.
I hold out hope that the thing they probably are most afraid of - being removed - will happen. Just not in the way they were expecting.
Thank you for highlighting Justice KBJ and including her opinions. It was shocking that the other 2 "liberal" justices sided with the majority. Treating this regime as "normal" is the major mistake this court is making. However, given the current fascist coup which has happened and which we the people will continue working to overcome her dissents create light enough to see more clearly not just what the implications of their decisions are for today, but reveal the many trajectories and groups which have led to the current fascist regime. Overturning this regime and the movement spawned several generations ago rooted in white supremacy," christian" nationalism, and concentrated wealth will be the order of the day for years to come...IF we the people really want a democracy where all means all.
She is a true justice. Her book gave a great deal of insight to what has molded her approach to her role as a Supreme Court Justice. Her ability to articulate what needs to be stated is exceptional!
The most crucial test of the Supreme Court’s level of corruption will be if and when it takes on the question of Trump’s ban on birthright citizenship. If it sides with Trump on this issue it will be saying that both the President and the Supreme Court have the power to rewrite the constitution by nullifying one of its amendments. At that point democracy and the rule of law are both dead letters. Frankly, the Supreme Court has become a kangaroo court dominated by conservative toadies for whom I have nothing but Supreme Contempt.
A wonderful commentary that will be read in history books in the future life of this country, if there is one.
She will be remembered for all ages. My fervent wish is that she can remain in a true democracy.
Fabulous post Jen Rubin in the Contrarian!
Such clear thinking and precision.The embodiment of Justice.
It is unfortunate that we don't have more sitting Justices on what purports to be the Supreme Court. With the current majority, the Court has become far less independent and much more supportive of a president's orders that in the face of other Courts would have been seen as illegal. What we currently have is a majority who no longer look to serve the good of the people.
Trump & MAGA will likely get the opportunity to replace Alito and Thomas with younger versions of those extremists. Dems should be planning containment strategies.