Alleged Corruption in the US Supreme Court

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

I have already written about the basic flaws in the Constitution of the United States, framed as it was to serve the legal rights of the white male community of the nation over 200 years ago. However, recent ethical violations of bribery and corruption committed by several Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, combined with the misinterpretations and omissions listed below, make the reframing of the Constitution not merely suggestive but mandatory.

Some of the Justices of the Supreme Court guilty of alleged violations are:

(a) African American Justice Clarence Thomas, appointed to the Bench by the elder Bush in the 1990s, is alleged to have accepted gifts from billionaire Republican donor with Nazi leanings, Harlan Crow. These “gifts” include the luxuriously refurbished home in which Thomas’ mother lives, rent-free. Thomas also has accepted gifts from Crow of lavish private plane and super yacht vacations, valued at more than $500,000, also without disclosure.

Thomas’ wife, Ginny Thomas, a white lady and Trump supporter, urged on the January 6, 2021 insurrection with many messages and tweets to Trump’s Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows, exhorting him to do his utmost to ensure the success of the coup. Thomas was subsequently ruling on cases in the Court involving circumstances of the insurrection, a glaring conflict of interests.

(b) Jane Roberts, wife of Chief Justice John Roberts, made more than $10 million over a period of eight years, in commissions from top lawyers for matching them with elite law firms that had cases before the Supreme Court. Such commissions were unethically declared by Roberts as “salaries” earned by his wife.

(c) Justice Neil Gorsuch did not disclose a real estate transaction with the head of a law firm that practiced before the Court.

There probably have been many more such violations in the past, but these are examples of corruption that have recently been publicly exposed.

The total population of the US in the 1780s was 2,780,000, of which approximately two million were whites, for the preservation of whose rights the current Constitution was drafted. The Court is now required to protect the rights of approximately 335 million people of all colors and races, only 59% (approximately 200 million) being white.

The process of appointment to the Bench has become a game of musical chairs, where new members are nominated on the death or resignation of a sitting Justice by the incumbent president, confirmed by a simple majority in the Senate. The nomination of the new Justice is totally dependent on his/her political values being completely in tune with those of the incumbent president.

Today, the Republicans have a 6/3 majority in the Court, with three Justices manipulated and nominated by Trump and the Republican-controlled Senate, because of their radical conservative values. A right-wing Court which will exercise judicial control for the next few decades, because lifetime tenure is a feature of the appointment.

The Founders specified a process by which the original document, the Bill of Rights, which constitute the first 10 Amendments, could be further amended to accommodate societal and cultural changes over the years. There have been 17 Amendments added since. However, the language of some of these Amendments must be tightened, preferably rewritten, as they have been misinterpreted, ignored and abused by successive administrations, for various, usually religious, racial or financial reasons.

Amendments requiring either clarification or complete redrafting are:

1. The First Amendment includes the Establishment Clause, which states, according to Jefferson, “the legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State”.

Today, the majority of the Republican Party, especially its Trumpian MAGA element, favors the establishment of a Christian Nationalist state. According to Stella Rouse, University of Maryland’s professor of government, “Christian nationalism, a belief that the United States was founded as a white Christian nation and that there is no separation between church and state, is gaining steam on the right”.

Republican congresswoman, Marjorie Taylor Greene, the leader of the Trumpian cult of the Republican Party, declared, “We need to be a party of nationalism and I am a Christian, and I say it proudly, we should be Christian Nationalists”. Greene dreams of America as a nation ruled by white trash like Trump, the white supremacist cult and herself, just as the German Christian Nationalist movement became the driving force behind Nazi ideology in the 1930s, with equally ludicrous dreams of an ethnically pure nation of blonde, blue-eyed Aryans.

Certain red states have already flouted the free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment with impunity, banning reading and instruction in public schools of certain “unpleasant” subjects in the history of the United States. Thirty seven states, led by Florida and Texas, have already banned books descriptive of genocide, slavery, Jim Crow, racism, and LGBTQ rights, on grounds that such narratives of factual US history would induce guilt and confusion in the minds of today’s innocent white children.

Books banned by these red states include: The Diary of Anne Frank (Nazism and the Holocaust), The Life of Rosa Parks (civil rights icon of the 1950s), The Trail of Tears (native American oppression and genocide), Roe v. Wade and Abortion (reproductive freedom), Harry Potter (satanic themes), To Kill a Mockingbird (racial prejudice), and many, many other classical and historical novels, fact and fiction, just because they touch the delicate sensibilities of Christian right-wing, white supremacist kooks.

Actually, if these sanctimonious Republicans are serious about banning books that corrupt children, even ignorant adults, they should start with the Bible!

2. Former Conservative Nixon nominee, Chief Justice Warren Burger stated, in a 1990s interview, “The Gun Lobby’s interpretation of the Second Amendment has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word of fraud, on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies – the well-regulated militia would be maintained for the defense of the state. The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it guarantees every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapons he or she desires”.

With the recent escalation of racist and other violence, Americans must have the right to possess guns to defend themselves and their homes – that is not disputed. Nor should “sportsmen” be denied the right to own guns for hunting, though nowadays, hunting is a cruel pastime killing innocent animals for pleasure, not for sustenance as it was in the 18Americans accept citizens’ right to own and use automobiles, with the state retaining the power to regulate and license such purchases, and for users to pass a test certifying their record and competence to drive automobiles.

Is it therefore unreasonable to expect similar kinds of precautions – registration, license, background checks, minimum age and residency, certificate of competency, proof of transfer – for the purchase, use and transfer of firearms, especially military style killing machines like the AR 15s? Especially when the enactment of such laws has the approval of over 80% of all Americans.

Of course not, but such regulations will never be enforced as they would dry up the deep well of income of bribes received by venal Republican Senators from the Gun Lobby, the National Rifle Association.

3. The Eighth Amendment specifies that punishments may not be cruel, unusual or excessive. Can anyone deny that causing the death of a human being by hanging, the electric chair or lethal injection is cruel, unusual and excessive? And does waterboarding (simulated drowning) and other forms of torture, quaintly termed “enhanced interrogation techniques”, fall within the scope of this Amendment?

The answers are obvious. Most Americans favor the death penalty, though, thankfully, its application is gradually disappearing. Snowboarding was introduced by Bush after 9/11, and used in Guantanamo Bay on suspected Al Qaeda terrorists without the benefit of a trial. Waterboarding was banned by the Bush administration in 2006 as potentially being against international law.

In his election campaign in 2016, Trump’s answer to the question: Does torture work? was predictably, “Yes, absolutely, torture works….You bet your ass that I would approve more than waterboarding.”

4. The Ninth Amendment specifies that (the lack) of enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. These “certain rights” not enumerated in the Constitution include those retained by the LGBTQ community. Some states like Florida have already contravened the 19th Amendment by de-legitimizing these rights.

5. Consider the 17th Amendment. Today, there are 50 states with diverse populations, which makes this Amendment singularly unjust. For example, Wyoming, with a total population of 550,000 whites, and California, with an ethnically diverse population of over 40 million, are each represented in the Upper House by two Senators.

There are other major flaws in the electoral process, like the Electoral College and the Lame Duck period of the Presidency, during which the defeated President continues to enjoy the awesome powers of the Commander-in-Chief for six weeks. Trump made a mockery of this clause by using these powers to incite an insurrection in an attempt to violently overthrow the legally elected government.

Finally, the rule of law, including the basic tenet that no one is above the law, is not codified under any Article in the US Constitution. This omission enabled the Justice Department, weaponized by Trump through his sycophant Attorney General, William Barr, to rule that a sitting president cannot be arrested for any crime – in brief, is above the law. This illegal misinterpretation of the rule of law enabled Trump to get away with unprecedented corruption, thievery, obstruction of justice, culminating in sedition during his tenure of office.

The codification of the rule of law, that no one is above the law, together with the constitutional aberrations listed above, make the re-framing of the Constitution not merely imperative, but an urgent matter of national security and justice.

Whichever Party wins the presidency and has a majority in Congress in 2024 has very clear but divergent choices about remedying the anomalies and injustices of a document drafted over 200 years ago.

If the Democrats win, they can throw the old Constitution away, and appoint a team of the best constitutional scholars in the land, selected on a bi-partisan, multi-racial basis to frame a brand-new Constitution. One which will protect and serve the rights of all the nation’s citizens, irrespective of race, color, creed, sexual orientation or any other superficial difference.

The new Constitution should also ensure the safety of all citizens by imposing reasonable and indisputable regulations on the use of firearms: restore the constitutional right of all women of their reproductive freedoms. And, of course, codify the rule of law to ensure that no one is above the law.If the Trumpian Republicans win in 2024, they can also throw the old Constitution away, and plagiarize the Constitution of the Russian Federation, with a President for life and above the law!