JUSTICES V. GIULIANI AND TRUMP | Ginni Thomas At It Again | Wishful Thinking Driving Kennedy Rumors
May 8, 2018
SCOTUS V. GIULIANI
|Jennifer Rubin with The Washington Post explains that RUDY GIULIANI — and the president, for that matter — doesn’t have SCOTUS on his side. She notes that 18 justices, four of whom are still on the Supreme Court today, have ruled in one form or another that presidents are not above the law or immune to legal processes. JUSTICES BREYER, GINSBURG, KENNEDY and THOMAS were all part of the unanimous ruling in Clinton v. Jones that found PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON could not avoid civil suit while in office. Rubin writes, “As for the remaining five justices on the court, we find it impossible to believe all would rule in Trump’s favor if he tried to evade a subpoena to testify. To the contrary, CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN G. ROBERTS JR. (a court institutionalist) and JUSTICES SONIA SOTOMAYOR and ELENA KAGAN almost certainly would rule against Trump. Especially in light of Trump’s constant assaults on the legitimacy of the courts, justices would be exceptionally mindful of their role in checking the executive branch and preserving the rule of law.”
RAMPING UP THE RUMOR MILL
|“Sometimes when you hope for something intensely, it begins to appear in your imagination as a real thing at the very least encouragement.” Simply put, Ed Kilgore in New York Magazine thinks the latest round of rumors about a JUSTICE ANTHONY KENNEDY retirement is merely wishful thinking from Republicans hoping to energize their base ahead of the midterms.
BABY I SWEAR IT'S DÉJA VU
|“GINNI THOMAS is at it again. On Saturday, the conservative activist and lobbyist—and spouse of Supreme Court JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS—shared a meme on her Facebook page accusing Democrats of engaging in ‘a silent coup, not just against Trump, but also against the very premises of our constitutional republic.'” Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern weighs in on what he’s calling “just another day in the ethical mess at the Supreme Court.”
PODCAST DU JOUR
|The First Mondays podcast is quick to admit that the Supreme Court hasn’t given them much to talk about in their latest episode, but thankfully they’ve kept some discussion topics on ice for that very reason. They dig into the results of a couple patent-law cases and take a peek into their next season by talking about some of the recent grants.