WASHINGTON — Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday temporarily shielded Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, from having to answer questions from a special grand jury in Georgia investigating efforts to overturn former President Donald J. Trump’s election loss in the state.
Justice Thomas’s brief order was an “administrative stay,” meant to give the court some breathing room to weigh the senator’s emergency application asking the Supreme Court to bar the grand jury from questioning him.
On Saturday, Justice Thomas, who oversees the appeals court whose ruling is at issue, ordered prosecutors to respond to the application by Thursday. Such a request for a response is almost always a sign that the full court will weigh in on the matter.
Prosecutors appear to be particularly interested in any efforts Mr. Graham may have made to urge officials in Georgia, including its secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, to address allegations of voting irregularities before Congress was to vote in January 2021 to certify that President Biden was the legitimate winner of the presidential election.
Mr. Graham’s lawyers said that he was reviewing election-related issues in his role as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time.
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/24/us/politics/supreme-court-graham-thomas-testimony.html
at issue ...
Politicized or just doing his job? They'd have done the same for any Senator especially since the residents of one state are pursuing a Senator from another.
(no message)
Can’t abide a black man with an independent mind!
All he did was toss it to the full Court.
(no message)
(no message)
broke a federal law that says if a judge or family member has interests in a case the judge must declare themselves ineligible.
Something similar to conflict of interest. You might have heard of it.
But then, you’re always on edge and looking foolish, top gun atty.
(no message)
Yes, it has been done on occasion, Justice Brown most recently, but I am not aware of any federal statutory requirement covering the SCOTUS which makes its own rules. As you are aware it is a co-equal branch of the government so if it had to answer to federal statutes, it would not be co-equal.
Second, he did not take part in a deliberation on the case, just as your post states, he is the judge who oversees the Eight Circuit.
From your original post:
"On Saturday, Justice Thomas, who oversees the appeals court whose ruling is at issue, ordered prosecutors to respond to the application by Thursday. Such a request for a response is almost always a sign that the full court will weigh in on the matter."
So that looks to me as if his ruling on Sen. Graham's emergency application is that the prosecutors can and should respond and likely the entire Court will take up the matter.
Oh, Halleliua, Halleliua
Throw a nickel on the grass–Save a fighter pilot’s ass.
Oh, Halleliua, Oh, Halleliua
Throw a nickel on the grass and you’ll be saved.
(no message)
But as I say, well done, you're not the first to have mis-interpreted that statute.
Link: https://abaforlawstudents.com/2018/02/21/supreme-court-justices-recusal-code-conduct-united-states-judges/#:~:text=This%20code%2C%20while%20binding%20on%20lower%20federal%20court,Federal%20Claims%20judges%2C%20bankruptcy%20judges%2C%20and%20magistrate%20j
required to follow the lower court Ethical Standards...they (SCOTUS) should be held to the HIGHEST standards...this needs to change...btw, it's my understanding that the SCOTUS has performed many times with less than 9 Justices.
Justice Thomas is a disgrace.
be nice if our Justices comported themselves even more ethically than those at lower levels...sadly, that's not happening.
(no message)
(no message)
Hell, ya' can't even get into Syracuse's Newhouse school of journalism unless you prove that you are a liberal.
Bob Costas and I had dinner together one night at the Chicago Westin and we had a lubricated conversation over some Bordeaux.