Justice for Hire - SCOTUS

[Tgo01]

Is it though? Recusal is at theater discretion of the judge or by motion of a moving party.

So let me get this straight, recusal is at the discretion of the judge so therefore it can't possibly be corruption, even though she was getting money from this publisher and this publisher had business before the court and therefore benefited from said financial transaction?

But accepting gifts from close personal friends (and at the time it was also discretionary to report it), who don't have business before the court so they can't benefit from said gifts, is corruption?

Seran, just save everyone some time and say "LOL! Thomas is a black conservative so therefore GUILTY! Sotomayor is a Democrat so therefore INNOCENT!"

You must be frying what's left of your tiny brain trying to make sense out of defending Sotomayor's actual corruption and attacking Thomas when clearly there is no corruption.