Now if you want to bribe a judge, all you have to do is call it a tip.
this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
311 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19090 readers
4094 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I am honestly blown away there hasn't been any assassination attempts on any justices recently. They have record low public approval, never emding corruption scandals, and have been throwing out all these rulings that are blatantly undermining the rule of law.
I mean wouldn't people who are willing to break the law to kill not care much about other laws?
Omg, this is amazing. Ok hear me out, you think bribes are expensive, but at local or even state levels they can be very reasonable, so here's what we do is GoFundMe for legislators, where regular people bid money into escrow for a certain rep's vote and if they do it, they get the cash. Of course people of wrong opinion can also bid so it's not guaranteed to get you what you want, but you can collectively at least make it more expensive for them! Normal bribery requires all kinds of relationship development and professional lobbyists to make sure it's works right, so it's available only to the well funded few. Post-vote bribery is open to all and cuts the smarmy middlemen.
I know you're appalled, but consider how out of touch most reps are from their constituents. They are told all day long by these lobbyists that you don't really hate genocide or that you really count on them to keep drilling for oil. Here you can tell your real values to their face with money, the same arbiter of truth those billionaires are using. Not for a campaign, but for a specific vote!
That might work for the very short term. But the "bribes" you see are campaign finance and they are only so small because of laws. The real bribes are the jobs and consulting work after.
If you cam just pay them outright, costs will skyrocket.
seems like a good thread to plug https://represent.us
they describe themselves as
RepresentUs is America’s leading nonpartisan anti-corruption organization fighting to fix our broken and ineffective government. We unite people across the political spectrum to pass laws that hold corrupt politicians accountable, defeat special interests, and force the government to meet the needs of the American people.
here's their policy platform https://represent.us/policy-platform/
they claim to have played a part in over 185 pieces of legislation (mostly at the state level) that contributed to their core platform https://represent.us/our-wins/
here are their ongoing campaigns presented state by state https://represent.us/2024-campaigns/
nobody and no organization are perfect but I feel like most people can find something to agree on here
Anti corruption laws, pushing for ranked choice voting, popular interstate vote compact, and fighting gerrymandering? Oh yeah, donated.
The decision also comes as the Supreme Court itself has faced sustained criticism over undisclosed trips and gifts from wealthy benefactors to some justices that led the high court to adopt its first code of ethics, though it lacks an enforcement mechanism.
The conservative faction:
"We've investigated ourselves and found wrongdoing, so now we're making the wrongdoing legal"
That's a fucking blow to the politicians. They can't even take the money on a flimsy promise anymore. they've got to actually deliver before they get to pocket it. I wonder what kind of cut I could make on being an escrow.
Justices that ruled that bribery as "gratuity" is legal:
- John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States
- Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice
- Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice
- Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice
- Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice
- Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice
Justices that ruled that bribery is illegal:
- Justices Elena Kagan, Associate Justice
- Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice
- Ketanji Brown Jackson, Associate Justice
Its far past time to riot. Blatant corruption at every turn.
No, it's time to vote. Fucking vote.
If voting stopped corruption there would no longer be corruption.
Ironically, it's voting that led to all this corruption. The uneducated, ignorant, scared, hateful masses put corrupt grifters in office.
That's not going to improve anything, but it could prevent it from getting worse
The supreme court justices get "gratuities" from decisions conservative magnates want. They are just applying that corrupt standard to every American population.
The Supreme Court basically just ruled that it's perfectly acceptable for officials to accept and even ask for bribes, just so long as they wait a few weeks after the service for which the bribe is meant to pay.
Seriously. That's exactly what this ruling in effect says - that bribes are only bribes if they're paid before the service is rendered, and if they're paid after, that's perfectly fine.
And people still wonder why I'm such a cynic...
Not exactly the AP article is bad. You still can't make an agreement before the act and get paid latter or ask for a payment latter.
However as long as you keep it sufficiently wink wink nudge nudge you are fine as intent now has to be proven.
But would it help to think of it as a tipping jar for officials?
It doesn't help me, the only tip they need is to do their jobs better.
Does this now flow down as precedent for people who decide contracts?
I don't see any possible way it couldn't. Every official is going to expect a "gratuity" in exchange for approving a contract, and every contractor who expects to succeed is going to go into every deal with the understanding that they're going to be expected to pay a "gratuity" after the deal is finalized.
The upshot of it all can only be wholly institutionalized pay-to-play, with only the ultimately entirely meaningless requirement that the payment has to be deferred instead of up front.
The dumbest part about this ruling is it treats every bribe as unrelated to every other bribe. The majority ignored the basic trait of every human with a prefrontal cortex, that we judge future planning by past experience.
So even ignoring the "first bribe is free" effect of the decision, what will happen in effect is that legislators and politicians will pass laws they think will gain bribes, be paid by interests that benefit after the fact, and after that without a single word, have an understanding that such back-dated bribes can continue indefinitely. Regular, consistent bribery is legal and easy, under this ruling.
This is it, exactly. They are going to start voting in a way that generates themselves the most future gifts, actual justice be damned.
Who do you think is going to be able to afford future gifts? Because it sure as hell isn't going to be the little guy.
They actually called it a gratuity. Maybe not the worst ruling of all time but one of the most shameless.
They called it a gratuity to try to divert attention from the bludgeoningly obvious fact that it's just a postdated bribe.
This is what this country has come to. In the face of an ever-growing failure of the government to represent the will of the people because their influence has been bought and paid for by moneyed interests, the Supreme Court is legalizing bribery.
Of course, it's certainly not a coincidence that one of the institutions that's been bought and paid for is the Supreme Court itself.
It's not a bribe, silly. It's selling legislation.
With Net 45 terms