Category: Federal Judge

The time has come for Chief Justice John Roberts to understand that, we, the people, are onto him, and that we demand an immediate attitude change from him, or he should resign. Roberts needs to understand that he has overplayed his hand, and the jig is up. It is no secret that Roberts steadfastly refuses to adopt a formal set of ethics rules for the United States Supreme Court —the only court in the United States without a formal set of ethics rules. Roberts says that “every justice seeks to follow high ethical standards” and therefore a code of ethics for the Supreme Court is unnecessary. Roberts’ stated position is that the Supreme Court has “no reason to adopt the Code of Conduct as its definitive source of ethical guidance.” Roberts says that “every justice seeks to follow high ethical standards” and that they may turn to “judicial opinions, treatises, scholarly articles and disciplinary decisions,” and also seek advice from one another. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/supreme-court-chief-justice-john-roberts-gives-incomplete-history-lesson-ncna1286943. That is laughable at best. We all know about the fiasco surrounding Justice Samuel Alito and the so called “leak” regarding the draft opinion that was written by Alito calling on the Court to overrule Roe v. Wade —the landmark 1973 opinion that legalized abortion which has been overturned by the current clown court headed by Roberts. https://www.npr.org/2022/06/24/1102305878/supreme-court-abortion-roe-v-wade-decision-overturn. And we all know about Clarence Thomas’ refusal to recuse himself from a case involving White House January 6 records which revealed texts Thomas’ wife, Ginni, had sent about the bid to overturn the 2020 election. So much for so called “ethics”. But what people don’t know is how Chief Justice John Roberts looks the other way in the face of evidence of case fixing and cover up by… Read More

The attorney general of the United States, Merrick Garland, likes to publicly talk about the so called “rule of law”. In his press conference addressing the warrant served at Trump’s property at Mar-a-Lago and the confiscating of boxes of documents, Garland said “Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy. Upholding the rule of law means applying the law evenly without fear or favor. Under my watch, that is precisely what the Justice Department is doing.” https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11103507/Justice-Department-asks-judge-UNSEAL-search-warrant-Trumps-raid.html. Garland needs to put his money where his mouth is. He has a terrible track record of “Faithful adherence to the rule of law”. With all due respect, “upholding the rule of law” is precisely NOT happening under his “watch” when it comes to federal judges who are breaking the laws of the United States. It’s almost as though they have diplomatic immunity from arrest and criminal prosecution. Garland must have conveniently forgotten about how he didn’t take such a posture about the “rule of law” —that he likes to talk about so much— when he was put in charge of ruling on an ethics complaint against Texas judge, Edith Jones, of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, who was accused of an ethics violation of making public derogatory comments against Blacks and Hispanics including suggesting that Blacks and Hispanics are “predisposed to crime” and “prone” to violence” at a 2013 speech at a Federalist Society sponsored event at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. Several groups filed an ethical complaint against Jones for her derogatory public comments. The matter ended up before Garland who then appointed a special committee that included himself to handle the complaint. Only two people were allowed… Read More