Justice for Sale? Filing for the Chief Justice John Robert’s Disbarment After $20 Million Payout

The Chief Justice and His Wife Took $20 Million From Firms He Rules On.

Spreadsheets show Jane Roberts earned $10,323,842.70 in commissions over seven years.

• Over sixteen years of federal financial disclosure forms, Chief Justice John Roberts mischaracterized more than twenty million dollars in household income from law firms appearing before the Supreme Court.
• He concealed his wife’s equity stake in her employer for three consecutive years. He failed to recuse from more than five hundred cases argued at the Supreme Court by law firms that had paid his household millions in commissions.
• He architected the Court’s first ethics code and designed it to be unenforceable.
• This is a course of conduct stretching across two decades, connected by a single through-line: the belief that the rules that apply to every other federal judge do not apply to him.
• The governing standard is 28 U.S.C. § 455, which applies to every federal judge including Supreme Court justices. Roberts triggers all three recusal obligations.
• Subsection (a) says a judge “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” This is the appearance standard, and it does not require actual bias. It requires only that a reasonable person knowing the facts would question the judge’s impartiality. - Christopher Armitage

Follow John Roberts corruption

What you can do now!

Send a letter to the DC Bar Office of Disciplinary Counsel at 515 Fifth Street NW, Building A, Room 117, Washington DC 20001. Write it in your own words. The facts to include are that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. mischaracterized his wife's commission income as salary on sixteen years of federal financial disclosure forms, omitted a material equity interest for three consecutive years, and did not recuse from more than five hundred cases argued by law firms paying his household in commissions. The relevant statutes are 28 U.S.C. § 455, 5 U.S.C. § 13106, and 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and the rule to cite is DC Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c). It takes about ten minutes. - Christopher Armitage

This follows 12 other decisions by MAGA SIX PACK justices to rig the system for the billionaires who packed the Supreme Court.

• Ban abortions
• Gut Voting Right Act
• Approve Republican gerrymandering
• Let dark money flood politics
• Endorsed tax breaks for the rich
• Cripple EPA from fighting climate change
• Blocked gun safety measures
• Evict poor tenants during the pandemic
• Block immigration reform
• Ban Muslims from entering America
• Politicize justice system

Roberts' Supreme Court Hit Parade

Politicians in robes

"The inflamed public reaction stems also from the fact that the law changed because the court’s membership changed. The ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was the culmination of a political and politicized process to bolster the conservative majority by any means necessary. And this stacked court has — time after time, but most flagrantly in overruling Roe v. Wade — abandoned normal rules of restraint, twisted or ignored doctrine, and substituted raw power to achieve its desired result.

And this is how the institution undermines its own legitimacy. If the court behaves like just another political body, it loses the only power it has, of achieving public acceptance of its rulings." - Washington Post

Republicans have packed the courts

"If it were even remotely true that Supreme Court members behave apolitically, we wouldn't be seeing the blatantly obvious pattern we see in the votes, with frequent 5-4 decisions whose alignment doesn't need to be known, because we already know it... we know which of the 'liberal' and 'conservative' justices voted which way. We know which justices adhere to concepts like 'originalism' and 'textualism', and which consider the Constitution to be a 'live' document. We know which ones think they can divine the mindset of long dead Founding Fathers, and which ones think that idea is absurd." - Forum

Legitimacy is earned

“The way the court retains its legitimacy and fosters public confidence is by acting like a court,” said Justice Elena Kagan. “By doing the kind of things that do not seem to people political or partisan. By not behaving as though we are just people with individual political or policy or social preferences that we are making everybody live with, but instead we are acting like a court, doing something that is recognizably law-like. That is where we gain our legitimacy.”

Specifically, Kagan said, acting like a court means respecting precedent, applying judicial methodologies consistently and irrespective of outcome, and not lunging to make decisions more far-reaching than the pending case requires. “People are rightly suspicious if one justice leaves the court or dies and another justice takes his or her place and all of a sudden the law changes on you,” she said. “That doesn’t seem like law.” - Washington Post

Supreme Court strips Americans of their freedoms

TakeAway: Send a letter to the DC Bar Office of Disciplinary Counsel at 515 Fifth Street NW, Building A, Room 117, Washington DC 20001. Write it in your own words.

Deepak
DemLabs

DISCLAIMER: ALTHOUGH THE DATA FOUND IN THIS BLOG AND INFOGRAPHIC HAS BEEN PRODUCED AND PROCESSED FROM SOURCES BELIEVED TO BE RELIABLE, NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED CAN BE MADE REGARDING THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, LEGALITY OR RELIABILITY OF ANY SUCH INFORMATION. THIS DISCLAIMER APPLIES TO ANY USES OF THE INFORMATION WHETHER ISOLATED OR AGGREGATE USES THEREOF.

Credit: This infographic was created with the free Infogram app using cartoons from Political Cartoons.