Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?
-
Pop quiz: Which of these two Justices didn't recuse him/her self in a case involving an entity that he/she profited from?
Justice Sonia Sotomayor declined to recuse herself from multiple copyright infringement cases involving book publisher Penguin Random House despite having been paid millions by the firm for her books, making it by far her largest source of income, records show.
In 2010, she got a $1.2 million book advance from Knopf Doubleday Group, a part of the conglomerate. In 2012, she reported receiving two advance payments from the publisher totaling $1.9 million.
In 2013, Sotomayor voted in a decision for whether the court should hear a case against the publisher called Aaron Greenspan v. Random House, despite then-fellow Justice Stephen Breyer recusing after also receiving money from the publisher. Greenspan was a Harvard classmate of Mark Zuckerberg’s who wrote a book about the founding of Facebook and contended that Random House rejected his book proposal and then awarded a deal to another author who copied his book and eventually turned it into the movie The Social Network.
In 2017, Sotomayor began receiving payments each year from Penguin Random House itself, which continued annually through at least 2021, the most recent disclosure available, and totaled more than $500,000. In all, she received $3.6 million from Penguin Random House or its subsidiaries, according to a Daily Wire tally of financial disclosures.
In October 2019, children’s author Jennie Nicassio petitioned the Supreme Court to hear her lawsuit against Penguin Random House alleging that the book publisher had copied her book by selling one that was nearly identical. On the same day that the petition was distributed to the justices, Sotomayor received a $10,586 check from the publisher.
On February 24, 2020, the Supreme Court voted not to hear the case, denying the “writ of certiorari” and meaning that the case would remain where it left off — with a circuit court having found in the publisher’s favor. Sotomayor’s next check, coming in May of that year, was her largest ever from the parent company, at $82,807.
The Supreme Court does not reveal how individual justices vote when it comes to “cert,” but it does note when they recuse, which Sotomayor did not. Her decision not to recuse is particularly notable because Breyer again recused. Breyer received payments from Penguin Random House or Knopf each year, which he seemingly viewed as a conflict, even though he received only a tenth of the amount — $340,000 during the same time period — as Sotomayor (Breyer’s wife also wrote a book for the company).In 2017, Sotomayor began receiving payments each year from Penguin Random House itself, which continued annually through at least 2021, the most recent disclosure available, and totaled more than $500,000. In all, she received $3.6 million from Penguin Random House or its subsidiaries, according to a Daily Wire tally of financial disclosures.
wrote on 4 May 2023, 21:53 last edited by@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
In 2017, Sotomayor began receiving payments each year from Penguin Random House itself, which continued annually through at least 2021, the most recent disclosure available, and totaled more than $500,000. In all, she received $3.6 million from Penguin Random House or its subsidiaries, according to a Daily Wire tally of financial disclosures.
Oh, how nice of her to DISCLOSE how much money she gets and from where she gets her money.
Say, @George-K, was that a new article or something recently published? Did any one raise any complain at the time? It's not something being brought up just to distract the attention from Thomas, is it?
In any case, someone compiles a list of instances where justices should have recused themselves but did not: https://fixthecourt.com/2023/05/recent-times-justice-failed-recuse-despite-clear-conflict-interest/
Pretty much every current SCOTUS justice is cited except maybe Kavanaugh. Have fun looking it over.
-
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
In 2017, Sotomayor began receiving payments each year from Penguin Random House itself, which continued annually through at least 2021, the most recent disclosure available, and totaled more than $500,000. In all, she received $3.6 million from Penguin Random House or its subsidiaries, according to a Daily Wire tally of financial disclosures.
Oh, how nice of her to DISCLOSE how much money she gets and from where she gets her money.
Say, @George-K, was that a new article or something recently published? Did any one raise any complain at the time? It's not something being brought up just to distract the attention from Thomas, is it?
In any case, someone compiles a list of instances where justices should have recused themselves but did not: https://fixthecourt.com/2023/05/recent-times-justice-failed-recuse-despite-clear-conflict-interest/
Pretty much every current SCOTUS justice is cited except maybe Kavanaugh. Have fun looking it over.
wrote on 4 May 2023, 21:59 last edited by George K 5 Apr 2023, 22:27@Axtremus said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
Oh, how nice of her to DISCLOSE how much money she gets and from where she gets her money.
Because it was required by the rules of the court. She followed the rules.
Thomas's trips with Crow were not disclosed because, at the time, it was not required by the rules.
I admire both Justices for adhering to the standards established by the court.
ETA:
list of instances where justices should have recused themselves but did not
Yes, and that list doesn't list anything about Harlan Crow, but confirms the story about Sotomayor.
-
@Axtremus said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
Oh, how nice of her to DISCLOSE how much money she gets and from where she gets her money.
Because it was required by the rules of the court. She followed the rules.
Thomas's trips with Crow were not disclosed because, at the time, it was not required by the rules.
I admire both Justices for adhering to the standards established by the court.
ETA:
list of instances where justices should have recused themselves but did not
Yes, and that list doesn't list anything about Harlan Crow, but confirms the story about Sotomayor.
wrote on 4 May 2023, 23:44 last edited by@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
Yes, and that list doesn't list anything about Harlan Crow, but confirms the story about Sotomayor.
Thomas’ case is a developing story, we do not know how quickly that list gets updated.
-
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
Yes, and that list doesn't list anything about Harlan Crow, but confirms the story about Sotomayor.
Thomas’ case is a developing story, we do not know how quickly that list gets updated.
wrote on 4 May 2023, 23:50 last edited by@Axtremus said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
Yes, and that list doesn't list anything about Harlan Crow, but confirms the story about Sotomayor.
Thomas’ case is a developing story, we do not know how quickly that list gets updated.
Dance, monkey. Dance.
-
@Axtremus said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
Yes, and that list doesn't list anything about Harlan Crow, but confirms the story about Sotomayor.
Thomas’ case is a developing story, we do not know how quickly that list gets updated.
Dance, monkey. Dance.
wrote on 4 May 2023, 23:58 last edited byHey @Jolly,
https://nodebb.the-new-coffee-room.club/post/217506
…
C'mon, @LuFins-Dad and @Jolly, tell me it's OK and not out of the ordinary, short of officially winning a scholarship or qualifying for financial aid, for a U.S. judge to let non-family pays for his (grand)child's private school tuition. -
wrote on 5 May 2023, 00:05 last edited by
Dance, monkey. Dance.
-
wrote on 5 May 2023, 04:24 last edited by
As one of our very astute members have say before, It's about appearances.
I fail to see how anyone can excuse what they have done and think it is okay.
I could understand someone with a grade 5 education with no support team forgetting to check a box on a form.
It is another thing for Supreme Court judges to do it. As Dr. Phibes (I believe) pointed out, they are doing things that would get them fired (or at least reprimanded) if they worked for a lot of companies.
-
Pop quiz: Which of these two Justices didn't recuse him/her self in a case involving an entity that he/she profited from?
Justice Sonia Sotomayor declined to recuse herself from multiple copyright infringement cases involving book publisher Penguin Random House despite having been paid millions by the firm for her books, making it by far her largest source of income, records show.
In 2010, she got a $1.2 million book advance from Knopf Doubleday Group, a part of the conglomerate. In 2012, she reported receiving two advance payments from the publisher totaling $1.9 million.
In 2013, Sotomayor voted in a decision for whether the court should hear a case against the publisher called Aaron Greenspan v. Random House, despite then-fellow Justice Stephen Breyer recusing after also receiving money from the publisher. Greenspan was a Harvard classmate of Mark Zuckerberg’s who wrote a book about the founding of Facebook and contended that Random House rejected his book proposal and then awarded a deal to another author who copied his book and eventually turned it into the movie The Social Network.
In 2017, Sotomayor began receiving payments each year from Penguin Random House itself, which continued annually through at least 2021, the most recent disclosure available, and totaled more than $500,000. In all, she received $3.6 million from Penguin Random House or its subsidiaries, according to a Daily Wire tally of financial disclosures.
In October 2019, children’s author Jennie Nicassio petitioned the Supreme Court to hear her lawsuit against Penguin Random House alleging that the book publisher had copied her book by selling one that was nearly identical. On the same day that the petition was distributed to the justices, Sotomayor received a $10,586 check from the publisher.
On February 24, 2020, the Supreme Court voted not to hear the case, denying the “writ of certiorari” and meaning that the case would remain where it left off — with a circuit court having found in the publisher’s favor. Sotomayor’s next check, coming in May of that year, was her largest ever from the parent company, at $82,807.
The Supreme Court does not reveal how individual justices vote when it comes to “cert,” but it does note when they recuse, which Sotomayor did not. Her decision not to recuse is particularly notable because Breyer again recused. Breyer received payments from Penguin Random House or Knopf each year, which he seemingly viewed as a conflict, even though he received only a tenth of the amount — $340,000 during the same time period — as Sotomayor (Breyer’s wife also wrote a book for the company).In 2017, Sotomayor began receiving payments each year from Penguin Random House itself, which continued annually through at least 2021, the most recent disclosure available, and totaled more than $500,000. In all, she received $3.6 million from Penguin Random House or its subsidiaries, according to a Daily Wire tally of financial disclosures.
wrote on 6 May 2023, 06:20 last edited by taiwan_girl 5 Jun 2023, 06:28@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
Justice Sonia Sotomayor declined to recuse herself from multiple copyright infringement cases involving book publisher Penguin Random House despite having been paid millions by the firm for her books, making it by far her largest source of income, records show.
I guess that Judge Sotomayor was not alone.
"Sotomayor and Gorsuch had both signed major book deals with the publisher before the cases occurred, and both justices declined to recuse themselves from the cases involving Penguin Random House. Former Justice Stephen Breyer, who had reported receiving royalties from the publisher, recused himself from each of the cases."
-
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
Justice Sonia Sotomayor declined to recuse herself from multiple copyright infringement cases involving book publisher Penguin Random House despite having been paid millions by the firm for her books, making it by far her largest source of income, records show.
I guess that Judge Sotomayor was not alone.
"Sotomayor and Gorsuch had both signed major book deals with the publisher before the cases occurred, and both justices declined to recuse themselves from the cases involving Penguin Random House. Former Justice Stephen Breyer, who had reported receiving royalties from the publisher, recused himself from each of the cases."
wrote on 6 May 2023, 11:18 last edited by@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
wrote on 6 May 2023, 11:39 last edited by@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
Disclosure vs. secrecy — Thomas failed to disclose the gifts he received.
Just compensation vs. unusual gifts — earning royalties from books is easily understandable and there is no complain about the Random House payments being out of whack with what Random House pays other authors (market norms); selling real estate at (allegedly) above-market prices, staying in someone else’s property rent free, getting “free” renovations, having others (non-family) pay for your (grand)child’s private school tuition … you try arguing that these are “just compensation” or “market norms.” @LuFins-Dad and @Jolly tried to argue that the real estate stuff is somehow not out of the ordinary, but neither has so far touched the private school tuition stuff.
Why do you, @George-K, think they are piling on Thomas?
-
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
Disclosure vs. secrecy — Thomas failed to disclose the gifts he received.
Just compensation vs. unusual gifts — earning royalties from books is easily understandable and there is no complain about the Random House payments being out of whack with what Random House pays other authors (market norms); selling real estate at (allegedly) above-market prices, staying in someone else’s property rent free, getting “free” renovations, having others (non-family) pay for your (grand)child’s private school tuition … you try arguing that these are “just compensation” or “market norms.” @LuFins-Dad and @Jolly tried to argue that the real estate stuff is somehow not out of the ordinary, but neither has so far touched the private school tuition stuff.
Why do you, @George-K, think they are piling on Thomas?
wrote on 6 May 2023, 11:41 last edited by@Axtremus said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
Disclosure vs. secrecy — Thomas failed to disclose the gifts he received.
Just compensation vs. unusual gifts — earning royalties from books is easily understandable and there is no complain about the Random House payments being out of whack with what Random House pays other authors (market norms); selling real estate at (allegedly) above-market prices, staying in someone else’s property rent free, getting “free” renovations, having others (non-family) pay for your (grand)child’s private school tuition … you try arguing that these are “just compensation” or “market norms.” @LuFins-Dad and @Jolly tried to argue that the real estate stuff is somehow not out of the ordinary, but neither has so far touched the private school tuition stuff.
Why do you, @George-K, think they are piling on Thomas?
- They're piling on Thomas. It's obvious and has already been pointed out.
- Your inability to see that suggests you either have an agenda or you are an idiot. I don't think you are an idiot.
-
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
wrote on 6 May 2023, 13:10 last edited by@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
-
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
wrote on 6 May 2023, 13:11 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
Court Packing.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
Disclosure vs. secrecy — Thomas failed to disclose the gifts he received.
Just compensation vs. unusual gifts — earning royalties from books is easily understandable and there is no complain about the Random House payments being out of whack with what Random House pays other authors (market norms); selling real estate at (allegedly) above-market prices, staying in someone else’s property rent free, getting “free” renovations, having others (non-family) pay for your (grand)child’s private school tuition … you try arguing that these are “just compensation” or “market norms.” @LuFins-Dad and @Jolly tried to argue that the real estate stuff is somehow not out of the ordinary, but neither has so far touched the private school tuition stuff.
Why do you, @George-K, think they are piling on Thomas?
wrote on 6 May 2023, 13:18 last edited by@Axtremus said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
Disclosure vs. secrecy — Thomas failed to disclose the gifts he received.
He abided by the rules of the court as they existed at that time.
(grand)child’s private school tuition
Grand-NEPHEW's. Once again, look up the rules of disclosure.
I have no problem with being compensated for whatever work one does as long as the compensation is agreed-upon by all parties. I have no problem with accepting gifts from friends, regardless of size of said gift.
I have a problem when compensation might affect one's legal judgment, and I find the refusal to recuse in Sotomayor's case disturbing when the company that paid her had business before the court.
-
wrote on 6 May 2023, 13:20 last edited by
Facts don't matter, only the narrative.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
Court Packing.
wrote on 6 May 2023, 13:31 last edited by@Jolly said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
Court Packing.
Not sure what you mean as it relates to this case.
Court packing is a bad bad idea, regardless of which wants to do it.
-
@Jolly said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
Court Packing.
Not sure what you mean as it relates to this case.
Court packing is a bad bad idea, regardless of which wants to do it.
wrote on 6 May 2023, 13:51 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@Jolly said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
Court Packing.
Not sure what you mean as it relates to this case.
Court packing is a bad bad idea, regardless of which wants to do it.
Why does a political entity engage in court packing?
-
@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@Jolly said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
Court Packing.
Not sure what you mean as it relates to this case.
Court packing is a bad bad idea, regardless of which wants to do it.
Why does a political entity engage in court packing?
wrote on 7 May 2023, 01:19 last edited by@Jolly said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@Jolly said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@George-K said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:
@taiwan_girl that's right.
So, ask yourself, why are they piling on Thomas?
I don't know why. All three should be questioned. If you get lots of money from a company, it is pretty common sense that if that company has a case in front of you, you excuse yourself. All about appearances.
Judge Breyer is the only one that looks good and appears to have done the right thing.
Court Packing.
Not sure what you mean as it relates to this case.
Court packing is a bad bad idea, regardless of which wants to do it.
Why does a political entity engage in court packing?
Because they have a very short term view and assume that they can get some sort of short term benefit.
-
wrote on 11 Jul 2023, 17:44 last edited by
-
wrote on 11 Jul 2023, 17:48 last edited by
I must admit I own a couple of her books, but I only bought them for the sex scenes.
