Series:
Friends of the Court:
SCOTUS Justices’ Beneficial Relationships With Billionaire Donors
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.
We updated our “Supreme Connections” database
on Wednesday with new entries from recently released financial
disclosures from Supreme Court justices, as well as five filings from
2003 to 2007 we had previously been missing.
Defend the facts. Support independent journalism by donating to ProPublica.
“Supreme Connections” is
our database that makes it easy for anyone to browse justices’ financial
disclosures and to search for connections to people and companies
mentioned within them.
This update includes data
from eight disclosures made public last Friday, covering the 2023
calendar year. It does not include data for Justice Samuel Alito, who received a 90-day extension.
We have also added information from a 2003 filing from Alito and information from Chief Justice John Roberts’ 2004-07 filings that were previously obtained by JudicialWatch and archived by the Internet Archive.
While federal ethics law requires judges to file these disclosures each
year, the law requires most of them to be destroyed after six years,
making many disclosures from earlier years hard to find.
In total, the update adds $50,000 worth of gifts disclosed (including concert tickets given to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson by Beyoncé
herself), 18 new organizations and individuals, and more than 200 new
connections, such as book deals, trips and reimbursements.
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
So no immunity decision ha! This is how I see this going I’m not the most knowledgeable poster here on politics so I’m probably just being paranoid. Trumpolini bought the services of the three judges he got seated on the SC bench in return they have to pay back the favor hence the delay, They are waiting for the election to happen so they can both side the issue of immunity, if Biden wins they will rule that no one is above the law! if Trumpollini wins they will side with him and state that Presidents are immune to prosecution
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
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,360
Supreme Court upholds gun ban for domestic-violence restraining orders By Ann E. Marimow June 21, 2024 at 10:27 ET The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal law that prevents people who are subject to domestic-violence restraining orders from having firearms in its first major Second Amendment decision since a 2022 ruling that expanded gun rights. The court said the Constitution permits laws that strip guns from those deemed dangerous, one of a number of firearms restrictions that have been imperiled since the conservative majority bolstered gun rights in its decision two years ago known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In an 8-1 decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote that “an individual found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.” Bruen required the government to point to historic analogues when defending laws that place limits on firearms, leading to a spate of court challenges against limits on possessing firearms — including the one in this case, United States v. Rahimi.
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 upholds gun ban for domestic-violence restraining orders By Ann E. Marimow June 21, 2024 at 10:27 ET The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal law that prevents people who are subject to domestic-violence restraining orders from having firearms in its first major Second Amendment decision since a 2022 ruling that expanded gun rights. The court said the Constitution permits laws that strip guns from those deemed dangerous, one of a number of firearms restrictions that have been imperiled since the conservative majority bolstered gun rights in its decision two years ago known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In an 8-1 decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote that “an individual found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.” Bruen required the government to point to historic analogues when defending laws that place limits on firearms, leading to a spate of court challenges against limits on possessing firearms — including the one in this case, United States v. Rahimi.
continues..
a blind squirrel finds nuts every once in a while too.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway
Comments
ProPublica Updates “Supreme Connections” Database With New Justice Disclosures
The update includes data from eight financial disclosures made public last Friday that cover 2023, as well as information from some older filings.
Series: Friends of the Court: SCOTUS Justices’ Beneficial Relationships With Billionaire Donors
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.
We updated our “Supreme Connections” database on Wednesday with new entries from recently released financial disclosures from Supreme Court justices, as well as five filings from 2003 to 2007 we had previously been missing.
Defend the facts. Support independent journalism by donating to ProPublica.
Donate Now“Supreme Connections” is our database that makes it easy for anyone to browse justices’ financial disclosures and to search for connections to people and companies mentioned within them.
This update includes data from eight disclosures made public last Friday, covering the 2023 calendar year. It does not include data for Justice Samuel Alito, who received a 90-day extension.
The latest update includes two 2019 vacations retroactively added by Justice Clarence Thomas, which were paid for by billionaire Harlan Crow and which the justice had previously failed to disclose. ProPublica was the first to reveal those and an array of other significant gifts from several billionaires. Thomas previously argued he did not need to disclose such gifts.
We have also added information from a 2003 filing from Alito and information from Chief Justice John Roberts’ 2004-07 filings that were previously obtained by JudicialWatch and archived by the Internet Archive. While federal ethics law requires judges to file these disclosures each year, the law requires most of them to be destroyed after six years, making many disclosures from earlier years hard to find.
In total, the update adds $50,000 worth of gifts disclosed (including concert tickets given to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson by Beyoncé herself), 18 new organizations and individuals, and more than 200 new connections, such as book deals, trips and reimbursements.
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
Trumpolini bought the services of the three judges he got seated on the SC bench in return they have to pay back the favor hence the delay,
They are waiting for the election to happen so they can both side the issue of immunity, if Biden wins they will rule that no one is above the law!
if Trumpollini wins they will side with him and state that Presidents are immune to prosecution
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
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
By Ann E. Marimow
June 21, 2024 at 10:27 ET
The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal law that prevents people who are subject to domestic-violence restraining orders from having firearms in its first major Second Amendment decision since a 2022 ruling that expanded gun rights.
The court said the Constitution permits laws that strip guns from those deemed dangerous, one of a number of firearms restrictions that have been imperiled since the conservative majority bolstered gun rights in its decision two years ago known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
In an 8-1 decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote that “an individual found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.”
Bruen required the government to point to historic analogues when defending laws that place limits on firearms, leading to a spate of court challenges against limits on possessing firearms — including the one in this case, United States v. Rahimi.
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
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Looking for the draft now...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."