the court gets once decision right, then tanks the next 4 or 5. that tracks with this fucking court.
So you don't like the Constitution. Got it. Pack the courts right. Left don't like so change the rules? Weak. Weak. Weak
are you talking to me? your guys stole a fucking seat that was obama's to choose. do not come at me with that "left wants to change the rules" bullshit.
the court gets once decision right, then tanks the next 4 or 5. that tracks with this fucking court.
So you don't like the Constitution. Got it. Pack the courts right. Left don't like so change the rules? Weak. Weak. Weak
are you talking to me? your guys stole a fucking seat that was obama's to choose. do not come at me with that "left wants to change the rules" bullshit.
they also allowed trump to appoint the new lady less than 4 months before an election after millions of people had already voted.
maybe look at recent supreme court history before posting.
I hope OMMT or anyone else who buys the Trump-republican line of bullshit takes note of what you're saying, gimme, but don't hold your breath.
It was ridiculous to not allow BO to sit a judge. Awful.
but it is also true that the liberals don’t like the court now and want to change the rules to stack it themselves.
It’s not about “not liking” a court. The court is unrepresentative of the population it has power over. This court is the result of a series of an unprecedented manipulation of rules- creating an election year rule to deny BO right to fill Scalia’s seat while not enforcing that rule to fill RBGs seat immediately before an election
Also, when McConnell dropped the required votes needed to confirm from 60 to 50, it allows more extremist jurists to get confirmed, which is exactly what has occurred.
This is evidenced by a court aggressively claiming more power for itself, whether it chooses to decide cases with no aggrieved party, whether it chooses to overturn long established laws. These are moves that either never before occurred or were extremely rare. Now it’s common and not in the interest of close to sixty percent of Americans
It’s unfortunate independents see all this as “typical democrats don’t like the politics of THIS court.” This court’s actions are extreme and mostly unprecedented.
don't forget that trump's 3 appointees lied in their hearings all saying roe was settled law and established precedent. then they fucking overturn it.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
the court gets once decision right, then tanks the next 4 or 5. that tracks with this fucking court.
So you don't like the Constitution. Got it. Pack the courts right. Left don't like so change the rules? Weak. Weak. Weak
are you talking to me? your guys stole a fucking seat that was obama's to choose. do not come at me with that "left wants to change the rules" bullshit.
the court gets once decision right, then tanks the next 4 or 5. that tracks with this fucking court.
So you don't like the Constitution. Got it. Pack the courts right. Left don't like so change the rules? Weak. Weak. Weak
are you talking to me? your guys stole a fucking seat that was obama's to choose. do not come at me with that "left wants to change the rules" bullshit.
they also allowed trump to appoint the new lady less than 4 months before an election after millions of people had already voted.
maybe look at recent supreme court history before posting.
I hope OMMT or anyone else who buys the Trump-republican line of bullshit takes note of what you're saying, gimme, but don't hold your breath.
It was ridiculous to not allow BO to sit a judge. Awful.
but it is also true that the liberals don’t like the court now and want to change the rules to stack it themselves.
It’s not about “not liking” a court. The court is unrepresentative of the population it has power over. This court is the result of a series of an unprecedented manipulation of rules- creating an election year rule to deny BO right to fill Scalia’s seat while not enforcing that rule to fill RBGs seat immediately before an election
Also, when McConnell dropped the required votes needed to confirm from 60 to 50, it allows more extremist jurists to get confirmed, which is exactly what has occurred.
This is evidenced by a court aggressively claiming more power for itself, whether it chooses to decide cases with no aggrieved party, whether it chooses to overturn long established laws. These are moves that either never before occurred or were extremely rare. Now it’s common and not in the interest of close to sixty percent of Americans
It’s unfortunate independents see all this as “typical democrats don’t like the politics of THIS court.” This court’s actions are extreme and mostly unprecedented.
don't forget that trump's 3 appointees lied in their hearings all saying roe was settled law and established precedent. then they fucking overturn it.
This is a very important point and the key reason why I am disgusted. They knew where they stood on teh issue. There's no way the Federalist Society puts up a justice that wasn't anti-Roe.
It just seems that whenever 1 side doesn’t have power they use claims if illegitimacy to target that agency. Trump and the MAGA have been doing it full on speeding claims against various organization whenever they don’t do the bidding of their leader. And it seems the Dems are doing it with the Supreme Court now.
Since the court doesn't represent the will of the people (thinking abortion issues in particular), maybe we should get to vote in (or out) judges. We do that in most states and counties.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
It just seems that whenever 1 side doesn’t have power they use claims if illegitimacy to target that agency. Trump and the MAGA have been doing it full on speeding claims against various organization whenever they don’t do the bidding of their leader. And it seems the Dems are doing it with the Supreme Court now.
I think what’s going on right now can be defined as drastic. If dems controlled the SC and guns were on the chopping block Reps would consider that drastic, no? You do realize that what we’re seeing is the elimination of minorities and women seen but not heard? If trump wins and the house and senate are both R the rules to change a term limit for the president will be inevitable. Then we’re really fucked.
It just seems that whenever 1 side doesn’t have power they use claims if illegitimacy to target that agency. Trump and the MAGA have been doing it full on speeding claims against various organization whenever they don’t do the bidding of their leader. And it seems the Dems are doing it with the Supreme Court now.
I think what’s going on right now can be defined as drastic. If dems controlled the SC and guns were on the chopping block Reps would consider that drastic, no? You do realize that what we’re seeing is the elimination of minorities and women seen but not heard? If trump wins and the house and senate are both R the rules to change a term limit for the president will be inevitable. Then we’re really fucked.
Then it would be time to get the fuck out of dodge! There’s no way I’d stay in a country where a dick wad like Trumpolinni gets total power for life! And I bet some here will come on and say that could never happen here.
It just seems that whenever 1 side doesn’t have power they use claims if illegitimacy to target that agency. Trump and the MAGA have been doing it full on speeding claims against various organization whenever they don’t do the bidding of their leader. And it seems the Dems are doing it with the Supreme Court now.
I think what’s going on right now can be defined as drastic. If dems controlled the SC and guns were on the chopping block Reps would consider that drastic, no? You do realize that what we’re seeing is the elimination of minorities and women seen but not heard? If trump wins and the house and senate are both R the rules to change a term limit for the president will be inevitable. Then we’re really fucked.
Then it would be time to get the fuck out of dodge! There’s no way I’d stay in a country where a dick wad like Trumpolinni gets total power for life! And I bet some here will come on and say that could never happen here.
Canada would be lucky to have you
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
It just seems that whenever 1 side doesn’t have power they use claims if illegitimacy to target that agency. Trump and the MAGA have been doing it full on speeding claims against various organization whenever they don’t do the bidding of their leader. And it seems the Dems are doing it with the Supreme Court now.
I think what’s going on right now can be defined as drastic. If dems controlled the SC and guns were on the chopping block Reps would consider that drastic, no? You do realize that what we’re seeing is the elimination of minorities and women seen but not heard? If trump wins and the house and senate are both R the rules to change a term limit for the president will be inevitable. Then we’re really fucked.
Then it would be time to get the fuck out of dodge! There’s no way I’d stay in a country where a dick wad like Trumpolinni gets total power for life! And I bet some here will come on and say that could never happen here.
Canada would be lucky to have you
Ah thanks my friend! At this stage of my life Chile is my destination but Canada would not be out of the question 🙋♂️
The whole wrong identity is weird. But it was filed 7 years ago and no one contacting him until now? That is just as weird.
I don’t agree with other comments I’ve seen that relate this to open discrimination, such as restaurants refusing service to gay couples.
To me there’s a difference. One is creating something, the other is selling what already exists. I wouldn’t ask a Jewish Bakery to make me an Easter cake, but I’d expect them to sell me whatever dessert they already have for sale. Might be bad business, but I think it should be their choice what they create. I wouldn’t expect an immigrant-run shop to print signs for me that are anti-illegal immigration for a protest. They should be allowed to deny creating that for me. I don’t see the difference.
Well everyone is entitled to feel how they feel. I get what you’re saying. I just think it will segregate us further. And I do mean segregate. If I’m black I’m moving into a neighborhood close to black businesses because why bother if my skin color allows you not to serve me. That is segregation.
I disagree. For one, I think that right should only be reserved for those creating or making something unique. Like a website. I don’t think that is very common. I can’t remember the last time I had a business create something for me. Even my wedding I’m pretty sure we just got a standard cake and stock invitations, unless you count adding our name and date to it. And a refusal should require more than just race. How you enforce that part, or if you can, I don’t know. And second, I know racism still exist, but I truly believe the majority of people are good. I may not always like their politics or how they think government should spend money, but I don’t think they are bad. If a business is known for openly refusing service based on race or other criteria, I think it would most often hurt them more than it helps. But if you’re a Jewish Bakery who refused to write “Jesus Lives” on a cake for Easter, I think most people would understand.
this website case wasnt real. plaintiff made it up. admits it.
I’m surprised it made it all the way to the SC and nobody fact checked the basis of the suit to begin with.
That's just mindblowing -- the amount of sloppiness and negligence, be it willful or accidental, to miss these basic facts, I can't comprehend. So we have a SCOTUS ruling on a fabricated case, plaintiff might not even have had standing to bring the suit. Wow.
All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.
It just seems that whenever 1 side doesn’t have power they use claims if illegitimacy to target that agency. Trump and the MAGA have been doing it full on speeding claims against various organization whenever they don’t do the bidding of their leader. And it seems the Dems are doing it with the Supreme Court now.
Well as we’ve seen there is no power like the SCOTUS. It’s completely unchecked. They’re grabbing more and more power, and there is no balancing power to offset. Every other govt power has a check and balance.
the court is supposed to be balanced, that’s what he key difference here. As an example I’ll say something very startling. Fifty years ago when Roe became the law of the land, the courts ideology was also 6-3 conservative.
But the huge difference was that five of the seven votes supporting the Roe decision were republican appointed jurists. That’s seems impossible in the current world.
Also, consider all of the ethically shady stories coming out lately and many posted on this forum. It’s very clear there is zero balance coming from the conservative justices. They are now political beings with their minds made up before cases come to their court, and they exist in a political machine.
The framers didn’t give them term limits in the thought that they’d be independent deciders of constitutional issues. This has become perhaps the biggest fail of the constitution. And it gets drowned out in party politics. Independents, key voters who often swing elections, do not think of govt power abuse in this manner. But reading these ethically challenging stories of late, it’s clearly abuse of power by the conservative justices.
They are they exact opposite of what a balanced jurist is supposed to be. The legal system symbol is a scale. Just not in the American Supreme Court.
The Scales of Justice are perhaps the most familiar symbol associated with the law, symbolizing the impartial deliberation, or "weighing" of two sides in a legal dispute. The Book of Judgment or Law represents learning, written knowledge and judgments.
It just seems that whenever 1 side doesn’t have power they use claims if illegitimacy to target that agency. Trump and the MAGA have been doing it full on speeding claims against various organization whenever they don’t do the bidding of their leader. And it seems the Dems are doing it with the Supreme Court now.
Well as we’ve seen there is no power like the SCOTUS. It’s completely unchecked. They’re grabbing more and more power, and there is no balancing power to offset. Every other govt power has a check and balance.
the court is supposed to be balanced, that’s what he key difference here. As an example I’ll say something very startling. Fifty years ago when Roe became the law of the land, the courts ideology was also 6-3 conservative.
But the huge difference was that five of the seven votes supporting the Roe decision were republican appointed jurists. That’s seems impossible in the current world.
Also, consider all of the ethically shady stories coming out lately and many posted on this forum. It’s very clear there is zero balance coming from the conservative justices. They are now political beings with their minds made up before cases come to their court, and they exist in a political machine.
The framers didn’t give them term limits in the thought that they’d be independent deciders of constitutional issues. This has become perhaps the biggest fail of the constitution. And it gets drowned out in party politics. Independents, key voters who often swing elections, do not think of govt power abuse in this manner. But reading these ethically challenging stories of late, it’s clearly abuse of power by the conservative justices.
They are they exact opposite of what a balanced jurist is supposed to be. The legal system symbol is a scale. Just not in the American Supreme Court.
The Scales of Justice are perhaps the most familiar symbol associated with the law, symbolizing the impartial deliberation, or "weighing" of two sides in a legal dispute. The Book of Judgment or Law represents learning, written knowledge and judgments.
And I can only imagine the HOWLING from the right if Sotomayor had gone on an all expenses paid fishing trip with a billionaire with a case pending or on its way up to SCOTUS, or if a billionaire patron bought Ketanji Brown Jackson’s family homestead under the guise of “admiration for the justice and preservation of ‘history.’” Or if their spouses worked for law firms before the court or advocated for a side with business before the court.Never mind a liberal version of a Project Veritas gimmick to bring a case with no harmed claimant, and who, in years past, would have been deemed without standing. And the Chief Justice bemoans the criticism of the court’s legitimacy? Please.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor's staff prodded colleges and libraries to buy her books
By Eric Tucker, Brian Slodysko
Yesterday
WASHINGTON (AP) — For colleges and libraries seeking a boldfaced name for a guest lecturer, few come bigger than Sonia Sotomayor, the Supreme Court justice who rose from poverty in the Bronx to the nation’s highest court.
She has benefited, too — from schools’ purchases of hundreds, sometimes thousands, of the books she has written over the years.
Sotomayor’s staff has often prodded public institutions that have hosted the justice to buy her memoir or children’s books, works that have earned her at least $3.7 million since she joined the court in 2009. Details of those events, largely out of public view, were obtained by The Associated Press through more than 100 open records requests to public institutions. The resulting tens of thousands of pages of documents offer a rare look at Sotomayor and her fellow justices beyond their official duties.
In her case, the documents reveal repeated examples of taxpayer-funded court staff performing tasks for the justice's book ventures, which workers in other branches of government are barred from doing. But when it comes to promoting her literary career, Sotomayor is free to do what other government officials cannot because the Supreme Court does not have a formal code of conduct, leaving the nine justices to largely write and enforce their own rules.
“This is one of the most basic tenets of ethics laws that protects taxpayer dollars from misuse,” said Kedric Payne, a former deputy chief counsel at the Office of Congressional Ethics and current general counsel for the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan government watchdog group in Washington. “The problem at the Supreme Court is there’s no one there to say whether this is wrong.”
Supreme Court staffers have been deeply involved in organizing speaking engagements intended to sell books. That is conduct prohibited for members of Congress and the executive branch, who are barred under ethics rules from using government resources, including staff, for personal financial gain. Lower federal court judges are also instructed to not “lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance” their “private interests.”
In a statement, the Supreme Court said it works with the justices and their staff to ensure they are "complying with judicial ethics guidance for such visits.”
“When (Sotomayor) is invited to participate in a book program, Chambers staff recommends the number of books (for an organization to order) based on the size of the audience so as not to disappoint attendees who may anticipate books being available at an event,” the court said.
The documents obtained by AP show that the justices’ conduct spans their conservative-liberal split. Besides book sales, appearances by the justices were used in hopes of raising money at schools, which often invited major contributors to the events. Justices also lent the allure of their high office to partisan activity.
In 2019, as Sotomayor traveled the country to promote her new children’s book, “Just Ask!,” library and community college officials in Portland, Oregon, jumped at the chance to host an event.
They put in long hours and accommodated the shifting requests of Sotomayor’s court staff. Then, as the public cost of hosting the event soared almost tenfold, a Sotomayor aide emailed with a different, urgent concern: She said the organizers did not buy enough copies of the justice’s book, which attendees had to purchase or have on hand in order to meet Sotomayor after her talk.
“For an event with 1,000 people and they have to have a copy of Just Ask to get into the line, 250 books is definitely not enough,” the aide, Anh Le, wrote staffers at the Multnomah County Library. “Families purchase multiples and people will be upset if they are unable to get in line because the book required is sold out.”
It was not an isolated push. As Sotomayor prepared for commencement weekend at the University of California, Davis law school, her staff pitched officials there on buying copies of books in connection with the event. Before a visit to the University of Wisconsin, the staff suggested a book signing.
At Clemson University in South Carolina, school officials offered to buy 60 signed copies before a 2017 appearance; Sotomayor’s staff noted that most schools order around 400. Michigan State University asked Sotomayor to come to campus and in 2018 spent more than $100,000 on copies of her memoir, “My Beloved World,” to distribute to incoming first-year students. The books were shipped to the Supreme Court, where copies were taken to her chambers by court workers and signed by her before being sent to the school.
Sotomayor, whose annual salary this year is $285,400, is not alone in earning money by writing books. Such income is exempt from the court’s $30,000 restriction on outside yearly pay. But none of the justices has as forcefully leveraged publicly sponsored travel to boost book sales as has Sotomayor, according to emails and other records reviewed by the AP.
Such promotional efforts risk damaging the Supreme Court’s public standing further by placing an individual justice above the institution itself, said J. Michael Luttig, a former federal appeals court judge who has pushed for the justices to adopt a formal code of conduct.
“I have never believed that Supreme Court justices should write books to supplement their judicial incomes,” said Luttig, who was considered for the Supreme Court by President George W. Bush. “The potential for promotion of the individual justices over the Court at the reputational expense of the Court as an institution, as well as the appearance of such, is unavoidable.”
Sotomayor’s publisher, Penguin Random House, also has played a role in organizing her talks, in some cases pressing public institutions to commit to buying a specific number of copies or requesting that attendees purchase books to obtain tickets, emails show. The publisher has had several matters before the court in which Sotomayor did not recuse herself.
“Justice Sotomayor would have recused in cases in which Penguin Random House was a party, in light of her close and ongoing relationship with the publisher,” the Supreme Court said in a statement. “An inadvertent omission failed to bring Penguin’s participation in several cases to her attention; those cases ultimately were not selected for review by the Court. Chambers’ conflict check procedures have since been changed.”
A person close to Sotomayor, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the justice’s book dealings, said that Sotomayor “has not and will not profit from sales” of her memoir beyond the $3.1 million advance that she received and that doing so would “require purchases of hundreds of thousands of additional books, more than double the purchases to date.”
Sotomayor, however, continues to earn royalties — at least $400,000 since 2019 — from sales of her children’s literature, including “Just Ask!,” her second best-selling book, which was the promotional focus of the 2019 event held in Portland, emails and records show.
That summer, after an aide to Sotomayor first contacted Portland Community College to gauge its interest in hosting a book talk, officials at the Oregon school called it an “exciting possibility.” Officials committed to spending $1,000 to host the event. Co-host Multnomah County Library pledged an additional $1,500.
Costs associated with the event spiked to more than $20,000 by the time it was held in September 2019. Emails show Supreme Court staff, including Le, a longtime legal assistant to the justice and graduate of the community college, closely controlled the run-of-show, requesting the largest venue possible, while managing minor details such as the placement of stairs or approving the TV camera angles that would be used.
As the talk neared, Le shifted her focus to books, which were offered for sale online to those who obtained tickets to the free event.
“Can you please show me the screen where people can purchase books?” Le wrote library staffers as they prepared to make the tickets available. “Are you just placing Just Ask … on the portal or all of the Justice’s books.”
When the free tickets were quickly snapped up, she asked library officials to publicize that those who could not get tickets could still meet the justice if they purchased a book.
“Please also let them know that they can attend the signing line to meet the Justice even if they are not able to attend the event,” Le wrote in an Aug. 26, 2019, email.
A day later, she followed with another email, concerned that not enough of the people who got tickets had also purchased a book. Records indicate that the roughly 550 free tickets made available to the public (the rest were reserved for VIP guests) resulted in the advance purchase of only 28 books.
“Is there a reminder going out that people need to purchase a book at the event or bring a book to get into the signing line?” Le wrote. “Most of the registrants did not purchase books.”
Still, when she found out event organizers had only purchased 250 copies of Sotomayor’s book, she sent an email telling library officials that the quantity was “definitely not enough.”
A library staffer emailed back, “Maybe you should communicate with (Sotomayor’s publisher) and the book sellers about your concerns?”
A library spokesman, who was also included on the emails, declined to comment.
In its statement, the Supreme Court said judicial ethics guidance “suggests that a judge may sign copies of his or her work, which may also be available for sale” so long as there is “no requirement or suggestion that attendees are required to purchase books in order to attend.”
“Justice Sotomayor’s Judicial Assistant has worked with the Justice’s publisher to ensure compliance with these standards, and at no time have attendees been required to buy a book in order to attend an event,” the court statement read. “Asking whether attendees were reminded that they must either buy or bring a book in order to enter a signing line at an event would in no way conflict with the standard outlined above.”
Some institutions that bought Sotomayor's books initiated the purchases on their own, raising the prospect of high-volume orders with the court as they extended the invitation to host her.
In 2018, Michigan State spent $110,000 for 11,000 copies of "My Beloved World,” to distribute to incoming first-year students after selecting it for an annual reading program with the city of East Lansing.
“Her biography is really just kind of, for lack of a better term, a rags-to-riches story. I mean, she came from very humble beginnings and became a Supreme Court justice,” East Lansing Public Library director Kristin Shelley told the AP, explaining the book selection.
The books were shipped to the Supreme Court, scores of cartons at a time, to be signed by Sotomayor.
“Hello Supreme Court team: Good news!” a Penguin Random House worker emailed court staff. “The order that Anh and I have been waiting for from Michigan State University is in! They are going to be ordering a total of 11,004 HC (hard cover) copies. But don’t panic. We will not be delivering 11,004 copies to the Supreme Court at one time.”
When university officials mistakenly thought they might be missing 20 boxes of books they had ordered, Le expressed surprise, writing, “I literally prepped the boxes and had my aides count the books before signing. I even have a spreadsheet noting how many books were signed each day.”
Other colleges have made similar purchases. The University at Albany in New York bought about 3,700 copies before a 2017 appearance. Stony Brook University in New York ordered roughly 3,900 copies in 2018 for use in a first-year reading program.
When the subject arose of how many Sotomayor books Clemson should purchase before a 2017 visit, school officials worried 60 might be too many to sign. Sotomayor’s legal assistant reassured them it would not be a problem because “most institutions order in the ranges of 400 and up.”
Other justices have benefited from similar arrangements. But how much they have made from individual schools or events is difficult to assess because the justices only report lump-sum earnings at year’s end.
Justice Clarence Thomas has collected about $1 million since 2006. Stephen Breyer, who retired in 2022, reported roughly $700,000 in royalty income in the past two decades. Justice Neil Gorsuch has disclosed more than $900,000 since his 2017 confirmation. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was confirmed in 2020, received a reported $2 million advance for a forthcoming book. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson signed a book deal, but the amount of her advance was not public.
In Sotomayor’s case, her staff routinely brought up books in emails as trip details were discussed.
“Depending on quantity and if they get hardcover or paperback, she will sign them,” Le told a professor at the UC Davis law school, which arranged to host her for commencement weekend in 2018. “She is signing over 11,000 for one school right now,” Le added with a smiling emoji, apparently referencing Michigan State’s purchase.
The law school ultimately ordered 410 signed copies of “My Beloved World,” after Le broached the idea of ordering copies. But one law school official took issue after a colleague relayed what he said was a question from Sotomayor's staff about setting up a book table during graduation festivities.
“I’m not sure this is a good idea, have we ever allowed other speakers to sell or offer their books (that we have purchased for guests)?” Kelley Weiss, the law school’s head of marketing and communications, wrote to the dean. “I think having a table of her books could be out of place,” she added. Weiss declined to comment to the AP.
Then planning took a turn. Weeks before the ceremony, Sotomayor fractured her shoulder and canceled her appearance. The school in turn canceled its $6,500 book order and sought a refund.
Still, Sotomayor’s office inquired to make sure.
“Is it for sure that UC Davis would like to move forward with canceling?” Le emailed. “I have the books on hold in storage and have not done anything with them.”
In about a month, the cancellation was processed.
___
The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about the AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Since the court doesn't represent the will of the people (thinking abortion issues in particular), maybe we should get to vote in (or out) judges. We do that in most states and counties.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
That's just mindblowing -- the amount of sloppiness and negligence, be it willful or accidental, to miss these basic facts, I can't comprehend. So we have a SCOTUS ruling on a fabricated case, plaintiff might not even have had standing to bring the suit. Wow.
the court is supposed to be balanced, that’s what he key difference here. As an example I’ll say something very startling. Fifty years ago when Roe became the law of the land, the courts ideology was also 6-3 conservative.
Also, consider all of the ethically shady stories coming out lately and many posted on this forum. It’s very clear there is zero balance coming from the conservative justices. They are now political beings with their minds made up before cases come to their court, and they exist in a political machine.
They are they exact opposite of what a balanced jurist is supposed to be. The legal system symbol is a scale. Just not in the American Supreme Court.
The Scales of Justice are perhaps the most familiar symbol associated with the law, symbolizing the impartial deliberation, or "weighing" of two sides in a legal dispute. The Book of Judgment or Law represents learning, written knowledge and judgments.
https://www.upworthy.com/roe-vs-wade-majority-opinion-written-by-lifelong-republican
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Welcome to the USP, the United States of Putin.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
WASHINGTON (AP) — For colleges and libraries seeking a boldfaced name for a guest lecturer, few come bigger than Sonia Sotomayor, the Supreme Court justice who rose from poverty in the Bronx to the nation’s highest court.
She has benefited, too — from schools’ purchases of hundreds, sometimes thousands, of the books she has written over the years.
Sotomayor’s staff has often prodded public institutions that have hosted the justice to buy her memoir or children’s books, works that have earned her at least $3.7 million since she joined the court in 2009. Details of those events, largely out of public view, were obtained by The Associated Press through more than 100 open records requests to public institutions. The resulting tens of thousands of pages of documents offer a rare look at Sotomayor and her fellow justices beyond their official duties.
In her case, the documents reveal repeated examples of taxpayer-funded court staff performing tasks for the justice's book ventures, which workers in other branches of government are barred from doing. But when it comes to promoting her literary career, Sotomayor is free to do what other government officials cannot because the Supreme Court does not have a formal code of conduct, leaving the nine justices to largely write and enforce their own rules.
“This is one of the most basic tenets of ethics laws that protects taxpayer dollars from misuse,” said Kedric Payne, a former deputy chief counsel at the Office of Congressional Ethics and current general counsel for the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan government watchdog group in Washington. “The problem at the Supreme Court is there’s no one there to say whether this is wrong.”
Supreme Court staffers have been deeply involved in organizing speaking engagements intended to sell books. That is conduct prohibited for members of Congress and the executive branch, who are barred under ethics rules from using government resources, including staff, for personal financial gain. Lower federal court judges are also instructed to not “lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance” their “private interests.”
In a statement, the Supreme Court said it works with the justices and their staff to ensure they are "complying with judicial ethics guidance for such visits.”
“When (Sotomayor) is invited to participate in a book program, Chambers staff recommends the number of books (for an organization to order) based on the size of the audience so as not to disappoint attendees who may anticipate books being available at an event,” the court said.
The documents obtained by AP show that the justices’ conduct spans their conservative-liberal split. Besides book sales, appearances by the justices were used in hopes of raising money at schools, which often invited major contributors to the events. Justices also lent the allure of their high office to partisan activity.
In 2019, as Sotomayor traveled the country to promote her new children’s book, “Just Ask!,” library and community college officials in Portland, Oregon, jumped at the chance to host an event.
They put in long hours and accommodated the shifting requests of Sotomayor’s court staff. Then, as the public cost of hosting the event soared almost tenfold, a Sotomayor aide emailed with a different, urgent concern: She said the organizers did not buy enough copies of the justice’s book, which attendees had to purchase or have on hand in order to meet Sotomayor after her talk.
“For an event with 1,000 people and they have to have a copy of Just Ask to get into the line, 250 books is definitely not enough,” the aide, Anh Le, wrote staffers at the Multnomah County Library. “Families purchase multiples and people will be upset if they are unable to get in line because the book required is sold out.”
It was not an isolated push. As Sotomayor prepared for commencement weekend at the University of California, Davis law school, her staff pitched officials there on buying copies of books in connection with the event. Before a visit to the University of Wisconsin, the staff suggested a book signing.
At Clemson University in South Carolina, school officials offered to buy 60 signed copies before a 2017 appearance; Sotomayor’s staff noted that most schools order around 400. Michigan State University asked Sotomayor to come to campus and in 2018 spent more than $100,000 on copies of her memoir, “My Beloved World,” to distribute to incoming first-year students. The books were shipped to the Supreme Court, where copies were taken to her chambers by court workers and signed by her before being sent to the school.
Sotomayor, whose annual salary this year is $285,400, is not alone in earning money by writing books. Such income is exempt from the court’s $30,000 restriction on outside yearly pay. But none of the justices has as forcefully leveraged publicly sponsored travel to boost book sales as has Sotomayor, according to emails and other records reviewed by the AP.
Such promotional efforts risk damaging the Supreme Court’s public standing further by placing an individual justice above the institution itself, said J. Michael Luttig, a former federal appeals court judge who has pushed for the justices to adopt a formal code of conduct.
“I have never believed that Supreme Court justices should write books to supplement their judicial incomes,” said Luttig, who was considered for the Supreme Court by President George W. Bush. “The potential for promotion of the individual justices over the Court at the reputational expense of the Court as an institution, as well as the appearance of such, is unavoidable.”
Sotomayor’s publisher, Penguin Random House, also has played a role in organizing her talks, in some cases pressing public institutions to commit to buying a specific number of copies or requesting that attendees purchase books to obtain tickets, emails show. The publisher has had several matters before the court in which Sotomayor did not recuse herself.
“Justice Sotomayor would have recused in cases in which Penguin Random House was a party, in light of her close and ongoing relationship with the publisher,” the Supreme Court said in a statement. “An inadvertent omission failed to bring Penguin’s participation in several cases to her attention; those cases ultimately were not selected for review by the Court. Chambers’ conflict check procedures have since been changed.”
A person close to Sotomayor, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the justice’s book dealings, said that Sotomayor “has not and will not profit from sales” of her memoir beyond the $3.1 million advance that she received and that doing so would “require purchases of hundreds of thousands of additional books, more than double the purchases to date.”
Sotomayor, however, continues to earn royalties — at least $400,000 since 2019 — from sales of her children’s literature, including “Just Ask!,” her second best-selling book, which was the promotional focus of the 2019 event held in Portland, emails and records show.
That summer, after an aide to Sotomayor first contacted Portland Community College to gauge its interest in hosting a book talk, officials at the Oregon school called it an “exciting possibility.” Officials committed to spending $1,000 to host the event. Co-host Multnomah County Library pledged an additional $1,500.
Costs associated with the event spiked to more than $20,000 by the time it was held in September 2019. Emails show Supreme Court staff, including Le, a longtime legal assistant to the justice and graduate of the community college, closely controlled the run-of-show, requesting the largest venue possible, while managing minor details such as the placement of stairs or approving the TV camera angles that would be used.
As the talk neared, Le shifted her focus to books, which were offered for sale online to those who obtained tickets to the free event.
“Can you please show me the screen where people can purchase books?” Le wrote library staffers as they prepared to make the tickets available. “Are you just placing Just Ask … on the portal or all of the Justice’s books.”
When the free tickets were quickly snapped up, she asked library officials to publicize that those who could not get tickets could still meet the justice if they purchased a book.
“Please also let them know that they can attend the signing line to meet the Justice even if they are not able to attend the event,” Le wrote in an Aug. 26, 2019, email.
A day later, she followed with another email, concerned that not enough of the people who got tickets had also purchased a book. Records indicate that the roughly 550 free tickets made available to the public (the rest were reserved for VIP guests) resulted in the advance purchase of only 28 books.
“Is there a reminder going out that people need to purchase a book at the event or bring a book to get into the signing line?” Le wrote. “Most of the registrants did not purchase books.”
Still, when she found out event organizers had only purchased 250 copies of Sotomayor’s book, she sent an email telling library officials that the quantity was “definitely not enough.”
A library staffer emailed back, “Maybe you should communicate with (Sotomayor’s publisher) and the book sellers about your concerns?”
A library spokesman, who was also included on the emails, declined to comment.
In its statement, the Supreme Court said judicial ethics guidance “suggests that a judge may sign copies of his or her work, which may also be available for sale” so long as there is “no requirement or suggestion that attendees are required to purchase books in order to attend.”
“Justice Sotomayor’s Judicial Assistant has worked with the Justice’s publisher to ensure compliance with these standards, and at no time have attendees been required to buy a book in order to attend an event,” the court statement read. “Asking whether attendees were reminded that they must either buy or bring a book in order to enter a signing line at an event would in no way conflict with the standard outlined above.”
Some institutions that bought Sotomayor's books initiated the purchases on their own, raising the prospect of high-volume orders with the court as they extended the invitation to host her.
In 2018, Michigan State spent $110,000 for 11,000 copies of "My Beloved World,” to distribute to incoming first-year students after selecting it for an annual reading program with the city of East Lansing.
“Her biography is really just kind of, for lack of a better term, a rags-to-riches story. I mean, she came from very humble beginnings and became a Supreme Court justice,” East Lansing Public Library director Kristin Shelley told the AP, explaining the book selection.
The books were shipped to the Supreme Court, scores of cartons at a time, to be signed by Sotomayor.
“Hello Supreme Court team: Good news!” a Penguin Random House worker emailed court staff. “The order that Anh and I have been waiting for from Michigan State University is in! They are going to be ordering a total of 11,004 HC (hard cover) copies. But don’t panic. We will not be delivering 11,004 copies to the Supreme Court at one time.”
When university officials mistakenly thought they might be missing 20 boxes of books they had ordered, Le expressed surprise, writing, “I literally prepped the boxes and had my aides count the books before signing. I even have a spreadsheet noting how many books were signed each day.”
Other colleges have made similar purchases. The University at Albany in New York bought about 3,700 copies before a 2017 appearance. Stony Brook University in New York ordered roughly 3,900 copies in 2018 for use in a first-year reading program.
When the subject arose of how many Sotomayor books Clemson should purchase before a 2017 visit, school officials worried 60 might be too many to sign. Sotomayor’s legal assistant reassured them it would not be a problem because “most institutions order in the ranges of 400 and up.”
Other justices have benefited from similar arrangements. But how much they have made from individual schools or events is difficult to assess because the justices only report lump-sum earnings at year’s end.
Justice Clarence Thomas has collected about $1 million since 2006. Stephen Breyer, who retired in 2022, reported roughly $700,000 in royalty income in the past two decades. Justice Neil Gorsuch has disclosed more than $900,000 since his 2017 confirmation. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was confirmed in 2020, received a reported $2 million advance for a forthcoming book. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson signed a book deal, but the amount of her advance was not public.
In Sotomayor’s case, her staff routinely brought up books in emails as trip details were discussed.
“Depending on quantity and if they get hardcover or paperback, she will sign them,” Le told a professor at the UC Davis law school, which arranged to host her for commencement weekend in 2018. “She is signing over 11,000 for one school right now,” Le added with a smiling emoji, apparently referencing Michigan State’s purchase.
The law school ultimately ordered 410 signed copies of “My Beloved World,” after Le broached the idea of ordering copies. But one law school official took issue after a colleague relayed what he said was a question from Sotomayor's staff about setting up a book table during graduation festivities.
“I’m not sure this is a good idea, have we ever allowed other speakers to sell or offer their books (that we have purchased for guests)?” Kelley Weiss, the law school’s head of marketing and communications, wrote to the dean. “I think having a table of her books could be out of place,” she added. Weiss declined to comment to the AP.
Then planning took a turn. Weeks before the ceremony, Sotomayor fractured her shoulder and canceled her appearance. The school in turn canceled its $6,500 book order and sought a refund.
Still, Sotomayor’s office inquired to make sure.
“Is it for sure that UC Davis would like to move forward with canceling?” Le emailed. “I have the books on hold in storage and have not done anything with them.”
In about a month, the cancellation was processed.
___
The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about the AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
___
Follow the AP's coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
for lower fed courts. not scotus according to roberts, "we can police ourselves"
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14