Turn on Sharpton right fugging now

[malaise]

Thomas and Scalia were at the Federalist Society dinner rubbing shoulders wuth the ReTHUG lawyer who is challenging the constitutionality of Obama's health care bill.

http://loyalopposition.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/10/step-right-up-buy-dinner-with-a-justice/

Step Right Up. Buy Dinner With a Justice
By ANDREW ROSENTHAL

The Federalist Society will have two very special honored guests at its annual dinner tonight in Washington, D.C.: Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

If they were mere federal judges they could not have accepted the invitation, because Canon 4(C) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges prohibits personal participation in fundraising activities. It states that judges should not “solicit funds for any organization, or use or permit the use of the prestige of judicial office for that purpose.”

It’s an excellent rule and it would apply to the Federalist Society’s $175 a plate, sold-out dinner, which is clearly a fundraiser, with Justices Scalia and Thomas the star attractions in the black-tie optional event billed as “A Celebration of Service.”

The problem is that Supreme Court justices are not bound by Canon 4(C). Lincoln Caplan, who writes about the court for the editorial page, sent me a note explaining why they ought to be:

Justices Scalia and Thomas are lending their prestige to raise money for and advance the interests of the Federalist Society, which, for the past generation, has made unequivocally plain its conservative ideological commitment.
add link

[liberal N proud]

1. Democracy destroyed!

We have lost this nation to the oligarchs.

[malaise]

2. This too will pass

:hi:

[Avalux]

3. How can they be impeached?

What needs to be done to make it happen? :mad: :banghead:

[rhett o rick]

6. Elect a progressive president. nm

[JoePhilly]

8. The President gets to impeach Supreme Court judges???? Might be time for a civics class.

[rhett o rick]

11. LOL. Very funny. If you think you need it, be my guest. But if the contry doesnt want a progressive

president, they sure as hell aint gona impeach Supreme Court judges (via their representatives of course). This country wont even deal with war criminals among us. We let them go on tv and push their products.

By the way, just how much do you think the president supports the 99% with the likes of Jeff Immelt as an adviser?

[JoePhilly]

13. Don't change the subject. Dennis could be the President and he'd be unable to impeach a single

Supreme Court Justice.

And because I made that fact apparent, you switch to a different attack on Obama.

Very transparent.

[elocs]

12. Will impeachment remove them? Did it remove Clinton? n/t

[Old and In the Way]

4. Meets my definition of "activist judge"

I hope Democrats cram this phrase up the backside of Republicans when they debate the next Executive nomination.

[bluestate10]

5. The ruling will come down to Kennedy and where he swings.

It is remotely possible that Roberts could join Kennedy if Kennedy goes with the liberal-moderate bloc on the court, but I don't hold out hope of that.

It is clear that Thomas would not vote to uphold the law given that his wife is a leading attacker of it. Scalia is a total lost fool. My only hope is that Kennedy will look at his role as critical and see the imbalance that Scalia and Thomas brings to the ruling and after that, write the opinion for the majority to uphold the law. Kennedy would have to write the opinion because he would be the senior jurist on the deciding side.

[karnac]

7. It's a total wash with Kagan on the court

Kagan, as solicitor general under Obama was heavily involved in formulating legal strategy to defend Obama's health care Initiatives. As well she should have been.

She refuses to recuse herself. As well she should.

[spanone]

9. we are so screwed. fairness in our government is a thing of the past.

[pacalo]

10. "And we will continue our partisan hobnobbing & fund raising & there's NOTHING anyone will do about

it!"