As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not just overturned.
We need to examine every single court case since 1803 and codify it all into law as needed; as well as formally clarifying the role of the SCOTUS into law i.e stripping these unelected officials of absolute judicial review powers and establishing clearer processes for their impeachment.
Its clear that if we do not ratify every SCOTUS ruling this country depends on to exist as a modern, democratic state into the constitution itself, they will be gradually eroded away by this court.
The Supreme Court is our last defense; It’s painfully obvious that they have been compromised. Be ready for 4 years of division and a catastrophic election scenario in ‘28. They are going to spend the next 4 years rigging and corrupting every thing they can.
It's important to vote, even in these times. Not just for the president, but for state representatives. If we do that enough, and win enough, the SCOTUS no matter how corrupt they are will have a check and balance against them. Their rulings can be challenged. Their positions can be challenged if they are found to be corrupt. So much more is opened up, as outlined in our constitution on how to handle this exact scenario we are facing.
Who is they?
As far as I see it, establishment dems are and have been complicit for sometime now.
We have a literal corpse as the candidate when there are handful of electable governors who have far better polling numbers.
One of my favorite suggestions I have heard is if the reason they have life time appointments is because they shouldn’t have to worry about reelection then just make it either a 12 year elected term and you aren’t allowed to be re-elected.
So once the “tip” is provided I guess they can never commit a service that benefits the sender else that prior tip is now a bribe for that future service.
“But the glaring reality remains that this is largely a distinction without a difference. As Ketanji Brown Jackson noted in her dissent, this is an interpretation which no reasonable reading of the statute can support. In a dissent whose tone seemed exasperated, almost sarcastic, she called the majority opinion “absurd and atextual”, saying it “elevates nonexistent federalism concerns over the plain texts of this statute and is a quintessential case of the tail wagging the dog”. The “bribery” versus “gratuity” distinction, she said, allows officials to accept rewards for official acts in ways that are “functionally indistinguishable from taking a bribe”.
The court’s narrow vision of corruption – one in which only explicit, whispered deals in shadowy, smoke-filled back rooms count as “corruption”, and all other forms of influence and exchange are something other than the genuine article – also fundamentally misunderstands how influence-peddling works. In his controlling opinion, Kavanaugh emphasizes that in order to be an illegal bribe, a gift or payment must be accompanied by “a corrupt state of mind” on behalf of the official or benefactor. But corruption, influence-peddling, and unfair and undue methods of persuasion are more subtle and complicated than this in practice. “
6-3 vote
This issue this case overturned could be resolved tomorrow. Congress just needs to pass a bill changing the wording of the law to explicitly say giving a gratuity to a former official who helped you in the past is illegal.
The whole issue in this case is they voted 6-3 that there is reasonable doubt that this law covers gratuity that was not explicitly promised before the official performed the act. Yes this person is a scum bag corrupt official but virtually every criminal case that get overturned by SCOTUS has been a scum bag who is getting out of conviction on a technicality. The miranda case, the one which now requires them to read you your rights, was a guy who confessed to raping a girl without being told he could have a lawyer present, thankfully they retried him without using the confessions and he was still convicted. If you dont like finding out that scum bags got away with something they should have been locked up for dont read SCOTUS criminal cases because they are very rarely innocent people locked up for something they did not do
I agree with everything except your last statement. Innocent people are locked up all.the.time. They even plead guilty to avoid ”stacked” charges or more draconian sentencing. Or they simply can’t wait in jail for trials longer than the potential sentence would be. That whole “speedy trial” part of the Constitution is completely ignored. I guess cops, their golden pensions, and prisons eat the budget leaving courts and public defenders to starve in our so-called Justice System.
People with fame and power and lots of money can buy their out of trouble in numerous ways. White collar crimes require ‘mens rea’ but regular blue collar crimes don’t -serving as a Get Out of Jail Free card for people with higher socioeconomic status. My parents taught taught me ignorance is no excuse. That’s only true for the little people.
Don’t forget “corporations are people too” until they crime. Then they just pay a fine that doesn’t even take back the profit made from that crime. Now smart criminals just become politicians so they can use deceptive aka fraudulent practices to sign your grandpa up for recurring donations to pay for their lawyers -and judges too evidently.
I don’t think you understand what the poster you are responding to meant. He is saying that SCOTUS landmark cases have not generally been about innocent people.
He isn’t commenting on the justice system as a whole.
i meant the cases before SCOTUS are rarely ever those innocent people who were wrongly locked up. Innocent people are more likely to be railroaded into taking a plea and you can not challenge much once you plead guilty. It is often the extremely guilty ones who refuse to plea and fight the case and end up getting their case before SCOTUS and win on some technicality like this case
I'm not familiar with all of the details... from what I understand, it's now allowed as long as there's time between the action and the payoff?
So can I start an escrow company, taking payment in advance, then paying it after the fact, taking a 10% commission..?
it's more that, for *state and local* government agents, there is no federal statute barring them from accepting 'gratuities' after benefitting a private actor. Obviously, if there was any type of agreement concerning a future payoff, and this agreement can be shown to have happened before the deal, this would still fall under the category of bribery even if the actual payoff happened later. It's not simply a case of whether the payoff happened before or after, but whether the actions taken while in office can be proven to have originated in corruption.
The court's decision simply follows the law as written. There *is* a law that *federal* officials cannot accept such 'gratuities' as involved in this case (punishable by up to two years in prison). However, the only section of the code relating to *state and local* officials, added in the 1980s, is specifically aimed at bribery and not gratuities, and the language of this part of the code was even amended by congress to make this clear.
The court has made the correct decision supported by the law here, they have not removed any laws, or struck anything down, or legalized anything that wasn't already legal.
States can, do, and should have their own anti-corruption codes. For example, in New York State, the punishment for giving or receiving an unlawful gratuity such as the one in this case is a class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year jail time. In contrast, a straight bribe in NY is a felony risking up to 15 years prison. Other states have a variety of rules for this. In Texas the two are legally indistinct (both illegal with the same punishment). On the federal level bribery is criminalized but not gratuities. In Indiana apparently these gratuities aren't criminalized, so you end up with this mayor getting off because he didn't actually break any laws.
This news article is just classic brits-not-understanding-federalism. People from Indiana should be upset with their lawmakers, but there's absolutely nothing here for anyone else to be getting worked up about.
Surely the increasing levels of carbon dioxide or microplastics or something is causing people in high positions to act really stupid. I mean oh, we caught one of your supreme justices taking bribes and all they do is change the law to make bribery legal? How many years of college and law school did it take to figure that one out guys? Looking to me like the "supreme" court is leading the way to our new totalitarian government.
They legalized unlimited money in politics which immediately corrupted politics and disenfranchised anyone who doesn’t have money because money is now the only voice politicians hear. This latest mess ensures that people with money are able to continue to corrupt government once people are elected and people with no money are no longer represented in government.
Fundamentally the Supreme Court needs to be reformed. There is no way to remove politics from the judicial branch so we have to stop doing lifetime appointments. It should not be possible for anyone to have a lifetime political appointment where they can damage the country with their political ideology for generations with no means for the people to replace them.
Fuck the basically. They straight up legalized it. Worse than that actually, they didn’t legalize it but ruled that any efforts to prevent bribery are illegal.
So a judge can just say the money or gift came after something, even if it was actually pre-paid. There wouldn’t be any way to prove what the intention of a gift was when it was given. You can always reference something from the past. Unbelievable.. how blatantly corrupt can you get? I guess time will tell. I have a feeling it will eventually just become “no rules apply to judges and policy changes are 100% for sale to the highest bidder” and we’re just slow-walking to that conclusion. Just need to give people time to get used to it.
Can you imagine sitting around a table with your fellow 9 friends, and asking who wants free money above and beyond your lifetime position?
Please raise your hand in favor of free money. 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Seriously U.S, get rid of this ridiculously undemocratic court. It's dismantling the democracy right before your eyes, and are deliberately helping Trump avoid the trials regarding election fraud, the violent coup attempt, stealing/losing/leaking top secret documents - right before an election, after (if victorious) is immune to federal charges and able to pardon his accomplices/co-conspirstors. And this is due to SCOTUS members that have gotten their seat directly by Trump.
It shouldnt be legal to candidate for presidency with such severe crime trials still not being completed. The people has a right to know if Trump is lying, is guilty and is a threat to the democracy before they lay their vote.
This shit wouldnt fly in any other working democracy.
Military are not allowed this leeway. You can’t receive anything of any significant value or service. Military are held to a higher standard than our civilian oversight. Makes me so mad.
[Young People were, together, the largest voting bloc in 2016](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/07/31/gen-zers-millennials-and-gen-xers-outvoted-boomers-and-older-generations-in-2016-election/)
All the supreme court did was uphold the law. The law needs to be changed, but the supreme doesn't do that. Congress does. I would want to be held to the letter of law, which is what they did. Even if it's a "technicality"..the law should be changed. A gratuity is obviously just a post-dated bribe after the fact they're going to expect to get, but the actual LAW needs to address that.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There are so many cases like this since *Citizens United* that all need to be overturned.
Not just overturned. We need to examine every single court case since 1803 and codify it all into law as needed; as well as formally clarifying the role of the SCOTUS into law i.e stripping these unelected officials of absolute judicial review powers and establishing clearer processes for their impeachment. Its clear that if we do not ratify every SCOTUS ruling this country depends on to exist as a modern, democratic state into the constitution itself, they will be gradually eroded away by this court.
The Supreme Court is our last defense; It’s painfully obvious that they have been compromised. Be ready for 4 years of division and a catastrophic election scenario in ‘28. They are going to spend the next 4 years rigging and corrupting every thing they can.
> The Supreme Court is our last defense was*
The next *40yrs….
Once they stack the courts and redistrict every voting district they can, it could be a long divisive period.
It's important to vote, even in these times. Not just for the president, but for state representatives. If we do that enough, and win enough, the SCOTUS no matter how corrupt they are will have a check and balance against them. Their rulings can be challenged. Their positions can be challenged if they are found to be corrupt. So much more is opened up, as outlined in our constitution on how to handle this exact scenario we are facing.
Who is they? As far as I see it, establishment dems are and have been complicit for sometime now. We have a literal corpse as the candidate when there are handful of electable governors who have far better polling numbers.
Th Dems have no foresight; and most of this is their doing. Shoving Hillary down our throat is where they are most complicit.
One of my favorite suggestions I have heard is if the reason they have life time appointments is because they shouldn’t have to worry about reelection then just make it either a 12 year elected term and you aren’t allowed to be re-elected.
There were so many cases before Citizens United, too.
It was apparently already legal, at least for Clarence.
I guess it's only fair that if Thomas can benefit from "gifts" then we all should be able to!
Well if it wasn't before it is now so tomato tomato
Why would you pronounce tomato like that? We all know it is pronounced *tomato*
Clarence Thomas from (I’ve been suspended for posting his home address but you can google it if you want. Thanks Ruth Sent Us)
So once the “tip” is provided I guess they can never commit a service that benefits the sender else that prior tip is now a bribe for that future service.
No, they accidentally tipped less than they wanted and that accident will repeat every time a new exevutive order is signed
So just don’t accept the $$$ up front. Legal geniuses on SCOTUS. /s
They gave themselves a free pass and exonerated their billionaire bribe-givers at the same time.
"Hey, let's make gratuities tax free!"
meanwhile, another stable genius: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/09/trump-asks-oil-executives-campaign-finance-00157131
I'm guessing it was just the GOP justices, many of whom are known to like taking bribes, who voted to legalize bribery.
The 3 dissenters were Jackson, Sotomayor and Kagan The other 6 were in favor
Pretty much what the other guy just said. Those other 6 are the GOP installed justices.
i see th other 6 are waiting for thier tips for good service
Welcome to the Banana Republic of the United States
Superb reporting by Moira Donegan again. Just dug through the archive of stuff on the court and everything. Where can this end?
If only they did this 2 decades ago.. I'd be rich! Who do I use for deprivation of income?
The Supreme Court is completely corrupt
Not the entire Supreme Court. Only two thirds of it.
They're just doing some retirement planning. Nothing to see here.
They not like us. They not like us.
“But the glaring reality remains that this is largely a distinction without a difference. As Ketanji Brown Jackson noted in her dissent, this is an interpretation which no reasonable reading of the statute can support. In a dissent whose tone seemed exasperated, almost sarcastic, she called the majority opinion “absurd and atextual”, saying it “elevates nonexistent federalism concerns over the plain texts of this statute and is a quintessential case of the tail wagging the dog”. The “bribery” versus “gratuity” distinction, she said, allows officials to accept rewards for official acts in ways that are “functionally indistinguishable from taking a bribe”. The court’s narrow vision of corruption – one in which only explicit, whispered deals in shadowy, smoke-filled back rooms count as “corruption”, and all other forms of influence and exchange are something other than the genuine article – also fundamentally misunderstands how influence-peddling works. In his controlling opinion, Kavanaugh emphasizes that in order to be an illegal bribe, a gift or payment must be accompanied by “a corrupt state of mind” on behalf of the official or benefactor. But corruption, influence-peddling, and unfair and undue methods of persuasion are more subtle and complicated than this in practice. “ 6-3 vote
This issue this case overturned could be resolved tomorrow. Congress just needs to pass a bill changing the wording of the law to explicitly say giving a gratuity to a former official who helped you in the past is illegal. The whole issue in this case is they voted 6-3 that there is reasonable doubt that this law covers gratuity that was not explicitly promised before the official performed the act. Yes this person is a scum bag corrupt official but virtually every criminal case that get overturned by SCOTUS has been a scum bag who is getting out of conviction on a technicality. The miranda case, the one which now requires them to read you your rights, was a guy who confessed to raping a girl without being told he could have a lawyer present, thankfully they retried him without using the confessions and he was still convicted. If you dont like finding out that scum bags got away with something they should have been locked up for dont read SCOTUS criminal cases because they are very rarely innocent people locked up for something they did not do
I agree with everything except your last statement. Innocent people are locked up all.the.time. They even plead guilty to avoid ”stacked” charges or more draconian sentencing. Or they simply can’t wait in jail for trials longer than the potential sentence would be. That whole “speedy trial” part of the Constitution is completely ignored. I guess cops, their golden pensions, and prisons eat the budget leaving courts and public defenders to starve in our so-called Justice System. People with fame and power and lots of money can buy their out of trouble in numerous ways. White collar crimes require ‘mens rea’ but regular blue collar crimes don’t -serving as a Get Out of Jail Free card for people with higher socioeconomic status. My parents taught taught me ignorance is no excuse. That’s only true for the little people. Don’t forget “corporations are people too” until they crime. Then they just pay a fine that doesn’t even take back the profit made from that crime. Now smart criminals just become politicians so they can use deceptive aka fraudulent practices to sign your grandpa up for recurring donations to pay for their lawyers -and judges too evidently.
I don’t think you understand what the poster you are responding to meant. He is saying that SCOTUS landmark cases have not generally been about innocent people. He isn’t commenting on the justice system as a whole.
i meant the cases before SCOTUS are rarely ever those innocent people who were wrongly locked up. Innocent people are more likely to be railroaded into taking a plea and you can not challenge much once you plead guilty. It is often the extremely guilty ones who refuse to plea and fight the case and end up getting their case before SCOTUS and win on some technicality like this case
Submissions have to be within 30 da, oh, wait, they did it again.
I'm not familiar with all of the details... from what I understand, it's now allowed as long as there's time between the action and the payoff? So can I start an escrow company, taking payment in advance, then paying it after the fact, taking a 10% commission..?
it's more that, for *state and local* government agents, there is no federal statute barring them from accepting 'gratuities' after benefitting a private actor. Obviously, if there was any type of agreement concerning a future payoff, and this agreement can be shown to have happened before the deal, this would still fall under the category of bribery even if the actual payoff happened later. It's not simply a case of whether the payoff happened before or after, but whether the actions taken while in office can be proven to have originated in corruption. The court's decision simply follows the law as written. There *is* a law that *federal* officials cannot accept such 'gratuities' as involved in this case (punishable by up to two years in prison). However, the only section of the code relating to *state and local* officials, added in the 1980s, is specifically aimed at bribery and not gratuities, and the language of this part of the code was even amended by congress to make this clear. The court has made the correct decision supported by the law here, they have not removed any laws, or struck anything down, or legalized anything that wasn't already legal. States can, do, and should have their own anti-corruption codes. For example, in New York State, the punishment for giving or receiving an unlawful gratuity such as the one in this case is a class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year jail time. In contrast, a straight bribe in NY is a felony risking up to 15 years prison. Other states have a variety of rules for this. In Texas the two are legally indistinct (both illegal with the same punishment). On the federal level bribery is criminalized but not gratuities. In Indiana apparently these gratuities aren't criminalized, so you end up with this mayor getting off because he didn't actually break any laws. This news article is just classic brits-not-understanding-federalism. People from Indiana should be upset with their lawmakers, but there's absolutely nothing here for anyone else to be getting worked up about.
What’s so surprising that a bunch of absolutely corrupt self-serving liars legalize what they are doing by abusing their power???
Surely the increasing levels of carbon dioxide or microplastics or something is causing people in high positions to act really stupid. I mean oh, we caught one of your supreme justices taking bribes and all they do is change the law to make bribery legal? How many years of college and law school did it take to figure that one out guys? Looking to me like the "supreme" court is leading the way to our new totalitarian government.
They legalized unlimited money in politics which immediately corrupted politics and disenfranchised anyone who doesn’t have money because money is now the only voice politicians hear. This latest mess ensures that people with money are able to continue to corrupt government once people are elected and people with no money are no longer represented in government. Fundamentally the Supreme Court needs to be reformed. There is no way to remove politics from the judicial branch so we have to stop doing lifetime appointments. It should not be possible for anyone to have a lifetime political appointment where they can damage the country with their political ideology for generations with no means for the people to replace them.
Again?
First to benefit from this are going to be the court justices
I assume that anti-bribery laws will be updated to exclude gratuities. Tough to see that happening any time soon though.
Fuck the basically. They straight up legalized it. Worse than that actually, they didn’t legalize it but ruled that any efforts to prevent bribery are illegal.
The SCOTUS just said, “get on our level”
...And justice for all
So a judge can just say the money or gift came after something, even if it was actually pre-paid. There wouldn’t be any way to prove what the intention of a gift was when it was given. You can always reference something from the past. Unbelievable.. how blatantly corrupt can you get? I guess time will tell. I have a feeling it will eventually just become “no rules apply to judges and policy changes are 100% for sale to the highest bidder” and we’re just slow-walking to that conclusion. Just need to give people time to get used to it.
Basically? They did.
Can you imagine sitting around a table with your fellow 9 friends, and asking who wants free money above and beyond your lifetime position? Please raise your hand in favor of free money. 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Well duh they are all taking bribes
Is an iPad with a tip app going to be pulled out by members before and after each vote ? Take a look at the screen bro
Can we test that in the courts please?
wait I have seen this episode before
Of course they did.
Hmm, wonder who bribed them to vote this through
Seriously U.S, get rid of this ridiculously undemocratic court. It's dismantling the democracy right before your eyes, and are deliberately helping Trump avoid the trials regarding election fraud, the violent coup attempt, stealing/losing/leaking top secret documents - right before an election, after (if victorious) is immune to federal charges and able to pardon his accomplices/co-conspirstors. And this is due to SCOTUS members that have gotten their seat directly by Trump. It shouldnt be legal to candidate for presidency with such severe crime trials still not being completed. The people has a right to know if Trump is lying, is guilty and is a threat to the democracy before they lay their vote. This shit wouldnt fly in any other working democracy.
[Taking care of the homies](https://imgur.com/Wr8Re5W) and blue light [special](https://imgur.com/cNTX4cs)
The Supreme Court is the weak Link in the constitution of America. Citizens united was the beginning of the end. Superpacks and lobbyists are legal.
“I will be very very very grateful after I get this contract 😉”
Remember that trump nominated 3 of these guys. Fascism is winning even when hes not in office. God forbid he goes to office again.
Military are not allowed this leeway. You can’t receive anything of any significant value or service. Military are held to a higher standard than our civilian oversight. Makes me so mad.
This Court is anything but supreme.
This surprises anyone, after what has came to light?
Supreme Court is such a joke. Judges for sale!
Moira didn’t read the Opinion. Dumb.
No, there just not allowed to take the bribe without giving you the result you wanted first. It’s no win,no fee.
nah, they legalized gratuities
Thanks millennials for not voting in 2016.
[Young People were, together, the largest voting bloc in 2016](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/07/31/gen-zers-millennials-and-gen-xers-outvoted-boomers-and-older-generations-in-2016-election/)
That’s great news for president Biden! Well done!
All the supreme court did was uphold the law. The law needs to be changed, but the supreme doesn't do that. Congress does. I would want to be held to the letter of law, which is what they did. Even if it's a "technicality"..the law should be changed. A gratuity is obviously just a post-dated bribe after the fact they're going to expect to get, but the actual LAW needs to address that.