General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA law professor condoning rank corruption and violations of disclosure
Link to tweet
( Amazing how many slimeballs are coming to his defense. )
RockRaven
(16,183 posts)to justify any exercise of power that they or those they are affiliated with engage in. They don't actually consider themselves bound by any of it; they have no non-negotiable principles or values.
Ocelot II
(120,482 posts)writes law review articles about the "necessity" of private religious schools, and once got an award from the Federalist Society. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicole_Stelle_Garnett So....
maxsolomon
(34,946 posts)Note there was no substance to her defense - didn't explain why ignoring Ethics rules is OK. Just an attack on those who had the gall to point it out.
cbabe
(4,108 posts)PDF AMY CONEY BARRETT - Notre Dame Law School
AMY CONEY BARRETT Notre Dame Law School Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 _____ EMPLOYMENT NOTRE DAME LAW SCHOOL Diane and M.O. Miller, II Research Chair in Law, 2014-2017 Professor of Law, 2010-present Associate Professor of Law (with tenure), 2008-2010 Associate Professor of Law, 2006-2008 ...
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Sure, other people, mere mortals and flawed human beings that they are, can be seduced by bribes and empty flattery. But Clarence Thomas, a god among men, whose goodness matches his greatness,* is impervious to such temporal concerns. He rules in favor of his wealthy pals and their corporate interests because his judicial philosophy just happens to line up with whatever they want. He'd do it for free! But when your friends want to do something nice for you, what are going to do? Insult them by turning down a little vacay on their superyacht or spending a week running naked through the woods at Bohemian Grove? I think not. The only possible reason anyone could have for finding fault with such magnanimous behavior is political gain. Thus sayeth the Professor.
*A sentiment I wholly agree with, but probably not in the way Professor Garnett does.
Ray Bruns
(4,554 posts)Paladin
(28,725 posts)Anita Hill rules!
Wednesdays
(20,308 posts)mcar
(43,418 posts)RAB910
(3,953 posts)patphil
(6,905 posts)That's the group that recommended the 3 Supreme Court justices that Trump nominated.
Apparently truth and ethics are optional considerations, well behind such things as far-right political positions on issues, and a callous disregard for the law.
It's no wonder that she is supporting Clarence Thomas' unethical and unlawful actions.
And, it appears that all 6 Republican SC judges have ties to the Federalist Society.
So, the horrible state of affairs of the US Judiciary is a result of their judicial activism.
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/03/in-audiobook-takeover-noah-feldman-lidia-jean-kott-explore-how-federalist-society-captured-supreme-court/
Antonin Scalia was also one of them...probably many more. They named a law school after him!
https://www.law.gmu.edu/students/orgs/federalist
If you read the 1 paragraph blurb on the web page above, you can see how diverse their words are from their actions.
lonely bird
(1,874 posts)Clarence Thomas has neither goodness nor greatness.
Lonestarblue
(11,709 posts)judge and especially any Supreme Court justice.
dchill
(40,337 posts)live love laugh
(14,271 posts)UTUSN
(72,294 posts)BeckyDem
(8,361 posts)He seems to think the lawmakers who showed up for work with bullhorns disrupting the work day is the greater problem. The level of gun violence exclusive to the USA? meh
LymphocyteLover
(6,616 posts)Tanuki
(15,279 posts)since he has none of either!
bringthePaine
(1,806 posts)Hekate
(94,431 posts)notKeith
(149 posts)Nicole Garnett, a law professor at Notre Dame Law School should NOT be a law professor at Notre Dame Law School. Someone in her position should not be able to -- with a clear mind -- look past Thomas' misbehavior, period.
Suffice it to say, if Clarence Thomas was a professor at Notre Dame Law School, he'd be sanctioned and dismissed for his behavior. But he's a SCOTUS justice, ergo, rules are for thee, but not for me.