Clarence Thomas had a stepson in private school. Harlan Crow paid his tuition

[Nostra]

That is their job.

Not even close, Simp.


Keep in mind this case never made it for review, so the clerk's role is non-existent.

What do law clerks do in the Supreme court?​

Asked by: Mrs. Ava Purdy | Last update: August 25, 2022

Score: 4.9/5 (26 votes)
A clerk's work for his or her justice also generally includes writing bench memos on the cases that the Court has accepted for full review, preparing possible questions for oral arguments, doing legal research, and perhaps even writing a first draft of the justice's opinion in a case.

What do law clerks do in the Supreme court?

A clerk's work for his or her justice also generally includes writing bench memos on the cases that the Court has accepted for full review, preparing possible

legalknowledgebase.com

 

[Nostra]

Typically, the broad range of duties assigned to a law clerk includes conducting legal research, preparing bench memos, drafting orders and opinions, proofreading the judge's orders and opinions, verifying citations, communicating with counsel regarding case management and procedural requirements, and assisting the judge during courtroom proceedings.

Resources - Duties of Federal Law Clerks - OSCAR

Still waiting for where it says researching the related companies of any and all parties to a suit that is never approved for review.

 

[struth]

If you say so. More reasonable people understand what law clerks do.

haha yeah they research the LAW! They write briefs

it would in fact be highly inappropriate for a court to on their own research the backgrounds of the parties in front of them

thank you for admitting you are unreasonable

 

[struth]

Not even close, Simp.


Keep in mind this case never made it for review, so the clerk's role is non-existent.

What do law clerks do in the Supreme court?​

Asked by: Mrs. Ava Purdy | Last update: August 25, 2022

Score: 4.9/5 (26 votes)
A clerk's work for his or her justice also generally includes writing bench memos on the cases that the Court has accepted for full review, preparing possible questions for oral arguments, doing legal research, and perhaps even writing a first draft of the justice's opinion in a case.

What do law clerks do in the Supreme court?

A clerk's work for his or her justice also generally includes writing bench memos on the cases that the Court has accepted for full review, preparing possible

legalknowledgebase.com

haha is reading comprehension hard for you? Where in any of that does it say their duty is to look into the background of the parties before the Court, including if they are company what they might be a subsidary of??? geez man....

 

[Nostra]

pknopp want us to believe his lying lefty article despite the following facts:

• He lied about the name of the company in the suit.
• The case was never accepted for review
• Despite the fact law clerks only work on cases accepted for review, P-Nutbag wants us to believe they researched this case.
• This case was about copyright infrigement.
• There has been no explanation from P-Nutbag as to why law clerks would research all the related companies to a party involved in a copyright infringement case. What possible impact would that have on the case?
• So P-Nutbag wants us to believe his clerks researched a case not accepted by the court, did research well outside their purview, found out it was a company related to a friend of his, told Thomas about this, and Thomas refused to recuse knowing this information.

And we have still yet to get answers as to if the vote to not hear the case was unanimous or not, or if Thomas' vote was critical to the outcome.

 

[Nostra]

haha is reading comprehension hard for you? Where in any of that does it say their duty is to look into the background of the parties before the Court, including if they are company what they might be a subsidary of??? geez man....

I think you quoted the wrong post, or are very confused.

 

[struth]

pknopp want us to believe his lying lefty article despite the following facts:

• He lied about the name of the company in the suit.
• The case was never accepted for review
• Despite the fact law clerks only work on cases accepted for review, P-Nutbag wants us to believe they researched this case.
• This case was about copyright infrigement.
• There has been no explanation from P-Nutbag as to why law clerks would research all the related companies to a party involved in a copyright infringement case. What possible impact would that have on the case?
• So P-Nutbag wants us to believe his clerks researched a case not accepted by the court, did research well outside their purview, found out it was a company related to a friend of his, told Thomas about this, and Thomas refused to recuse knowing this information.

And we have still yet to get answers as to if the vote to not hear the case was unanimous or not, or if Thomas' vote was critical to the outcome.

He's desperately searching for a reason to try and lynch the only black man on the bench....and desperately trying to cover for the fact that is the only reason he wants to lynch him,

 

[struth]

I think you quoted the wrong post, or are very confused.

I did, I was trying to quote PNUT

 

[eagle7-31]

A new revelation today in the Clarence Thomas corruption saga. When you read it, ask yourselves how conservatives would have reacted if George Soros had paid the tuition of Sonia Sotomayor's stepson

"In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia.

The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was “raising him as a son.” Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill.

A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin’s tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.

The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin’s tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica."

Clarence Thomas Had a Child in Private School. Harlan Crow Paid the Tuition.

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising “as a son.” “This is way outside the norm,” said a former White House ethics lawyer.

www.propublica.org

The USSC the left's new Trump. Go fly a kite.

 

[Orangecat]

It's called influencing a top judge of the nation.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

And then................no one cared.

 

[Orangecat]

A kid got a free education.
Isn't that what the LWNJs are all about, getting the wealthy to fund education?

 

[Nostra]

^^^^^Federal crimes by each and every one of those people^^^^^

Merritless Gestapoland stood by and did nothing.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Yep, and now the crickets.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Ooooppps, lol. Just a slight omission of course that liberal media wasn't wringing its hands in consternation over this for weeks.

Liberal SCOTUS Justice Took $3M From Book Publisher, Didn’t Recuse From Its Cases | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

 

[1srelluc]

Link?

Would you have given George Soros a pass for the same thing? No b******* answer please.

Putting some kid through a private school?

I'd give even Keyser Söze his due on that.

 

[lennypartiv]

It's called influencing a top judge of the nation.

It's a free country.

 

[Penelope]

Because they only do double standard

Because he is a republican.

 

[Penelope]

Putting some kid through a private school?

I'd give even Keyser Söze his due on that.

pknopp want us to believe his lying lefty article despite the following facts:

• He lied about the name of the company in the suit.
• The case was never accepted for review
• Despite the fact law clerks only work on cases accepted for review, P-Nutbag wants us to believe they researched this case.
• This case was about copyright infrigement.
• There has been no explanation from P-Nutbag as to why law clerks would research all the related companies to a party involved in a copyright infringement case. What possible impact would that have on the case?
• So P-Nutbag wants us to believe his clerks researched a case not accepted by the court, did research well outside their purview, found out it was a company related to a friend of his, told Thomas about this, and Thomas refused to recuse knowing this information.

And we have still yet to get answers as to if the vote to not hear the case was unanimous or not, or if Thomas' vote was critical to the outcome.

Thomas refused to recuse knowing this information.

 

[Penelope]

With the SC it is becoming an Autocracy.