Is this why the Supreme Court does what it does?

A recent report by the non-partisan Center For Public Integrity shows some of the justices like to party.  But that’s not really a good thing as the nation sends itself into a further decline because of judicial activism.

“Six of the court’s nine members received paid trips to Europe in 2014, including to Berlin, London and Zurich, as reported on the justices’ annual financial disclosure reports,” the site reported last week.

The reports, which look at travel income, stocks, gifts and even debts of the nine jsutices, show the many ways that the judges can pad their finances beyond their salary. According to the Federal Judicial Center, Associate Supreme Court justices earn a salary of $244,400, while the chief justice earns $255,500.  The report also said the judges hold significant investments that have helped turn most of them into millionaires.

Among the items are many trips.

The justices do not have to disclose the costs of their reimbursed travels, which included a three-week multi-stop trip that Justice Anthony Kennedy took to Salzburg, Austria, San Francisco and Aspen, Colorado, last July, paid for by the Aspen Institute and the University of the Pacific. New York University also paid for Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg to travel to Florence, Italy. Chief Justice John Roberts taught a class on the history of the Supreme Court to students of the New England School of Law in London.

As well as books.

Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer both reported income from book royalties, though Scalia’s books seem to be selling far better, earning more than $33,000 in 2014, compared with the $7,000 Breyer reported. However, Scalia’s books did not sell as well as they did the year before, when he reported nearly $77,000 in royalties.

And yes even properties.

Scalia’s property in Charlottesville, Virginia, netted him at least $5,000 a year in rent,

And stocks

(Samuel) Alito sold his Coca-Cola Co. stock on April 16, 2014, just before the court heard oral arguments in a lawsuit against Coca-Cola on April 21, allowing him to rejoin the rest of the court for the case after recusing himself from the initial proceedings.

Too bad Kagan and Ginsburg did not recuse themselves from the homosexual marriage debacle.  Many conservative groups and those who decry judicial activism are demanding Congress take action with their Republican majority.  One group, Mass Resistance, based in ultra-left Massachusetts is calling out those neocons who would cave to Obama/Boehner.

“According to the Court’s published rules, within 25 days of a ruling a party can ask the Court for a ‘rehearing’ of a case on pertinent issues that would merit an appeal. The issue of “merit” here is that Justices Kagan and Ginsburg – both of whom ruled “for” same-sex marriage — were clearly required by Federal law to recuse themselves from this case” the site said.

And they sited the aforementioned left progressives on the court Ginsburg and Kagan

During the year prior to the Supreme Court case, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan publicly performed same-sex “weddings.” At one such event,Ginsburg told people that the acceptance of same-sex “marriage” reflected “the genius of our Constitution.” Ginsburg also told Bloomberg Business News that she thought that  Americans were ready for gay marriage.

Kagan’s aggressive advocacy for LGBT “rights” goes back to her years as Dean of Harvard Law School (2003-2009), and is thoroughly documented in our MassResistance report.

The group sited one person who might be able to lead the charge, if he could get over his mistakes from the past.

It immediately became clear in the four states involved with this case, though dominated by Republicans, the officials had little interest in pursuing this further, despite the gross injustice of the case and the general outrage among millions over it.

So a few days after the ruling, national pro-family activist Janet Porter called together a few dozen of the top pro-family groups and activists (including MassResistance) to get it started.

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine appeared to be the most obvious choice to file it. He can act without permission of the Governor, he has a pro-family background, and several members of Janet’s group know him personally and could likely meet with him. A former US Senator, DeWine lost his seat in 2007 after supporting some oppressive pro-gay legislation, angering his conservative base. He apparently got the message. It’s widely rumored that he’s preparing to run for Governor.

On July 1, Janet’s group contacted DeWine. At least one of them spoke to him by phone. The Foundation for Moral Law emailed him a letter outlining the situation in detail. Governor Mike Huckabee sent him an email urging him to file the appeal as did several others. We were told that Rick Santorum also called him.

And sometimes civil disobedience may be called upon.  As Thomas Jefferson once said “Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God.”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: