SCOTUS, Now with KBJ

[French Rage]

He actually suggested that because that private jet was going whether he was on it or not, therefore it has zero dollar value and is therefore not a COI. Also, he saved the taxpayers money since he didn't need an air marshal escort to fly private. And that fishing lodge was a dump, it has since been renovated to look that nice!

Pathetic.

Those may be decent arguments. Know where would be a good place to discuss them? On the disclosure form he never filled out.

[SonofSouthie]

Apologize if this was already a discussion on here, but I think one of the better ethical guidelines on gifts is never to accept something as a gift that you couldn’t give as a gift. If a billionaire offers to pick up my tab at TGiFriday’s, no sweat - getcha back next time. But if a billionaire offers to fly me to Alaska on his private plane and take me fishing on (presumably) his private boat, I could never reciprocate, so that is out of bounds.

Even that breaks down a bit when you’re talking out billionaires buying influence with millionaires, though - plenty of Members would have the money to send a billionaire on that trip…..like they ever would.

It's pretty cut and dried where I work,

Anything worth $50 or more is considered to be "of substantial value" for purposes of the conflict of interest law. To determine substantial value, the Commission may consider, for example, the cost per person of entertainment hosted by the giver, what it would cost the public to purchase an item or the actual cost incurred by the giver in acquiring the gift given to the public employee. In some situations, the value of a gift will not be its retail price. The giver may have paid more, for example, than the face price of a ticket.

[aparch]

Apologize if this was already a discussion on here, but I think one of the better ethical guidelines on gifts is never to accept something as a gift that you couldn’t give as a gift. If a billionaire offers to pick up my tab at TGiFriday’s, no sweat - getcha back next time. But if a billionaire offers to fly me to Alaska on his private plane and take me fishing on (presumably) his private boat, I could never reciprocate, so that is out of bounds.

Even that breaks down a bit when you’re talking out billionaires buying influence with millionaires, though - plenty of Members would have the money to send a billionaire on that trip…..like they ever would.

The jokes write themselves, but my former engineering company did a lot of City of Chicago work, especially at O'Hare. To get badged for the airport, the *first* requirement was to watch a (very dry) two hour ethics video hosted by a City lawyer (couldn't FF, skip, etc, the website tracked all that).

*insert ALL the jokes about the City of Chicago and ethics*

The main take away was that as workers for the city, we were unable to accept any gift from anyone who also worked for or could influence the city (even as consultants/contractors).

Like, to the point where a close friend of mine, I knew of for years, happened to be working on an project at the airport asked if I wanted his baseball tickets for a game, and I had to decline because of the ethics rules so it didn't appear that my company was swayed by the gift. (I could have filled out a form declaring the value, a receipt of purchase of the tickets, etc., but the hassle wasn't worth it.)

At our level! Construction foreman and Construction Engineer Inspector.

[aparch]

Martinis from glacial ice! https://***********/justinelliott/st...3v2cVkMjQylOVg

appears Leonard Leo is setting up every conservative justice with a billionaire sugar daddy

If buying cocaine is God's way of telling you that you make too much money, what does buying Supreme Court Justices mean?

[LynahFan]

Apologize if this was already a discussion on here, but I think one of the better ethical guidelines on gifts is never to accept something as a gift that you couldn’t give as a gift. If a billionaire offers to pick up my tab at TGiFriday’s, no sweat - getcha back next time. But if a billionaire offers to fly me to Alaska on his private plane and take me fishing on (presumably) his private boat, I could never reciprocate, so that is out of bounds.

Even that breaks down a bit when you’re talking out billionaires buying influence with millionaires, though - plenty of Members would have the money to send a billionaire on that trip…..like they ever would.

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Martinis from glacial ice! https://***********/justinelliott/st...3v2cVkMjQylOVg

appears Leonard Leo is setting up every conservative justice with a billionaire sugar daddy

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Propublica is doing a piece on alito and asked him for comment.

he replied with a wsj editorial lol

https://***********/leahlitman/statu...3v2cVkMjQylOVg

He actually suggested that because that private jet was going whether he was on it or not, therefore it has zero dollar value and is therefore not a COI. Also, he saved the taxpayers money since he didn't need an air marshal escort to fly private. And that fishing lodge was a dump, it has since been renovated to look that nice!

Pathetic.

[dxmnkd316]

Also, worh alito clearly having a direct line to wsj, maybe roberts should reopen the case to investigate the Dobbs leak

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Also, worh alito clearly having a direct line to wsj, maybe roberts should reopen the case to investigate the Dobbs leak

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Oh, here’s why he freaked
Gross that wsj published his tantrum early
https://***********/js_kaplan/status...3v2cVkMjQylOVg

[Kepler]

What a piece of garbage.

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Propublica is doing a piece on alito and asked him for comment.

he replied with a wsj editorial lol

https://***********/leahlitman/statu...3v2cVkMjQylOVg

[unofan]

If you want to read a bunch of meaningless judicial sniping, the Iowa Supreme Court issued its latest decision in an abortion case today. It split 3-3 with one recusal, so that should've been it with a one line order saying the district Court was affirmed as a matter of law. But the 3 "dissenters" felt the need to bloviate, so of course the 3 who would've affirmed the district Court on the merits had to respond. None of it is precedential, and none of it should've ever been written, but instead we get 65 pages of grade school bickering.

https://www.iowacourts.gov/static/me...978CC0322E.PDF

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Looks like no Moore v Harper decision today

[dxmnkd316]

That is a lot. I'm taking "encouraging or inducing" as the First Amendment hook, so let's simplify to speech acts. Is a speech act advocating illegal activity for commercial advantage or private financial gain ever protected speech? Speech advocating illegal activity is certainly a protected form of protest. But. To make a buck?

Rocky: "Hey Bugs, knock over that bank and we can make a fortune."

Clancy: "Alright, Rocky. You're under arrest."

Rocky: "Nuh uh. Protected speech."

yeah, that could be one of those opinions that doesn't seem that important at the time but ends up being hugely foundational for other much scarier things.