SCOTUS: above the law?

The irony is so rich you can slice and dice it, given the U.S. Supreme Court’s insistence that lower courts abide by strict ethics rules … but operates on its own without any such restriction.

We have three justices on the nation’s highest court who now have some serious — and possibly egregious — ethics troubles hanging over them.

They start with the chief justice, John Roberts and include Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. The Senate Judiciary Committee had invited Chief Justice Roberts to visit with the panel about those questions, but Roberts declined, citing judicial independence.

Ridiculous.

Roberts’s wife is a headhunter for law firms, earning millions of dollars annually. The firms for which she works routinely have business before her husband’s court. Conflict of interest? Looks like it to me.

Justice Gorsuch sold some property to a lawyer with another mega firm, which also does business with the court. More conflict? Umm, yep!

Justice Thomas has demonstrated a nearly legendary lapse of judgment. His wife is part of the Big Lie crowd, believing the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump; a Texas gazillionaire has lavished gifts on the Thomases and the justice has failed to report them; the rich Texan also has purchased the justice’s mother’s home and allows her to live there rent free. What do you think about that? Yeah … conflict of interest.

But the court has no rules governing this conduct. There are no restrictions or reporting requirements demanded of the men and women who serve on the court.

These men all have one thing else in common: they are Republican-nominated justices.

Why mention the partisan label? Well, consider something else. Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris’s husband, Doug Emhoff, was a partner in an international law firm. By the time VP Harris was sworn into office, Emhoff quit his job, surrendering millions of dollars in income. Why? Because there might be a hint of conflict. He chose the right path and is now teaching law at Georgetown University, earning a handsome salary, but which is significantly less than he would have earned had he stayed employed by the mega firm.

No one can fire any of the justices, or the vice president. The only way to remove them from office is to impeach them and then convict them in a congressional trial. The three men mentioned here have ignored any pretense of ethical conduct; the vice president and her husband have chosen a more correct option.

There must be an accounting for the individuals who serve on the nation’s highest court. For the chief justice to resist any calls for ethics reform is to betray the high office he occupies.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Just quit, Justice Thomas!

Your humble blogger — that’s me! — has used this forum to call for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to resign because of what I believe is a conflict of interest involving his wife’s involvement with The Big Lie movement and the 2020 presidential election.

I now want to offer a brief explanation as to why it wouldn’t make a damn bit of difference on the high court.

The Supreme Court now comprises a 6 to 3 conservative majority. Thomas is one of the six; the others are Chief Justice John Roberts and associate justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch.

If Thomas left the court, it would still have a conservative majority, given that President Biden is likely to find a more, um, liberal judge to confirm to the court.

So, what’s the big deal? Justice Thomas no longer is able to serve on the court when his wife is actively involved in a matter involving the 2020 election, which keeps coming before the court on various rulings … which Thomas glaringly deviates from the majority by dissenting in favor of the 45th POTUS.

Then comes the news about Justice Thomas taking those lavish gifts from a billionaire Texan and refusing to report them, as he should have done. Good grief! Oh, and then the billionaire ends up buying a house for Thomas’s mother … and lets her live there rent-free!

Just resign, Justice Thomas.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

National mood: toxic

My eternal optimism is being tested to its limits by the current mood of the nation I love with all my heart.

It troubles me in the extreme to see the major political parties so deeply divided. I hurt at the prospect of congressmen and women expressing fear of working with their colleagues. I long for the day when these officials could differ on policy but remain friends in private.

When in the world did it occur? When did we become so full of hatred for each other? I know the answer to those rhetorical questions.

It occurred when Donald J. Trump rode down the escalator at Trump Tower and declared in 2015 that if he was elected president, he would ban Muslims from entering the country and would curb what he described as the tide of criminals streaming here from Mexico, accusing our hemispheric neighbors of being “rapists, murderers and drug dealers.”

It went downhill from there in a big hurry.

Then he declared that the media are the “enemy of the people.” He chastised gay Americans. He vowed to “make America great again.” He pitted Americans against each other.

He denigrated those who wanted to wear the uniform of the country in a time of war … a jab many of us took personally, if you get my drift.

The list is long. He left a nation damaged from his time in office. I am not going to believe the damage is permanent. That optimism in me wants to believe we can heal ourselves. I won’t let that belief go.

He is gone from public office. My sincerest hope of all is that he doesn’t ever return to public life, that the crimes I believe he committed will bring him down.

Meanwhile, my sincerest hope of all is that we can restore some semblance of collegiality and rid our public discourse of the extreme bitterness that infects it.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Not wanting to climb aboard

You may count me as one of the few — apparently, it seems — observers of the 2024 presidential campaign who is unwilling to examine every little thing that flies out of the mouth of the 45th POTUS.

Why? Because I am not yet willing to buy into the harebrained notion that the immediate past POTUS is going to be nominated to run against President Biden next summer.

It’s not because I trust the judgment of Republican primary voters. I already have declared that I mistakenly overestimated the intelligence of the average GOP primary voter. He and she seem all too willing to give the twice-impeached and once (so far) indicted ex-POTUS a pass on his previous disastrous term in office.

They have forgiven him for denigrating a physically challenged New York Times reporter, for bragging about grabbing women by their private area, for applauding the “lock her up” chants at his campaign rallies, for admitting he never has asked for forgiveness, for disparaging the Vietnam War service of a genuine hero, the late John McCain.

Oh, and the insurrection he incited on 1/6? Pffft! Who cares, right?

I am going to place my faith on the indictments that are sure to come from Fulton County, Ga., and from the Justice Department. They are examining some mighty serious criminal behavior that Donald Trump (allegedly) committed. If he’s convicted of any of the crimes, he could spend a lot of years in prison … given the AG’s declaration that “no one is above the law.”

I just do not know how he can run for POTUS and fight to keep the hounds at bay.

Maybe I’m wrong. I hope to have this one right.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

POTUS is as sharp as ever

I am going to offer a very brief warning to those who read this blog and who insist on hurling epithets at President Biden, alleging that he’s too old to run for a second term and that he’s lost his mental acuity.

Your blogger, that’s me, won’t accept that criticism or allow it on this blog. That’s right! I am going to keep my eyes peeled for those who insist that Joe Biden has lost his snap.

He has lost nothing. The president remains sharp and focused on the job of protecting us against enemies foreign and domestic. He is faithful to the oath he took when he became president.

Therefore, I simply am not going to allow that kind of defamatory criticism see light on this platform.

Are we clear? Good!

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Free press is ‘essential’

President Joe Biden stood at the podium this weekend at the White House Correspondents Dinner and made a stern and steadfast declaration about the value of a free press.

“A free press is essential to a democratic society,” he said, “and it is not the enemy.”

I want to offer a brief endorsement of the president’s statement, as it reflects the kind of understanding that a free, aggressive and unfettered press brings to those in power and to those who make decisions that affect our lives each day.

I feel the need to offer this endorsement because of the pummeling the press has been taking during the past, oh, six or seven years. As a member of what the right wingers and the MAGA crowd calls the “mainstream media,” I have taken great personal offense at the epithets being hurled at hardworking, dedicated reporters who signed on to report truthfully and fairly.

Presidents of both political parties, with one notable exception, have understood the role that a free press plays in holding government officials accountable. Does anyone in power like negative reporting on his or her activities? Of course not! However, to a person — again, except one — acknowledge that criticism simply goes with the territory.

Donald J. Trump launched the war against the media with his proclamation that the media are “the enemy of the people.” He turned “fake news” into a cliche that his followers picked up. I won’t belabor the obvious hypocrisy in that label coming from the godfather of fake news and outright lies. I do, though, want to suggest that news that runs counter to officials’ point of view isn’t “fake”; it is the truth that officials just don’t always want to hear.

President Biden’s inherent understanding of the media’s role in keeping him and the government he inherited accountable for their actions is a welcome return to what has been the standard since the beginning of the Republic.

May the press always remain free of government interference … and able to keep our government’s feet to the fire.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Flaps up in McKinney?

Voters in the next-door city of McKinney, Texas, are going to vote this week on a measure to expand the city’s airport to include commercial air travel.

I wish I could cast a vote this coming Saturday on this measure, which is a $200 million bond issue to add four gates to McKinney National Airport, expand the runway and build some parking lots. I would vote in favor of it … despite the organized opposition that is building against the plan.

There is something appealing to me, who lives in Princeton (about five miles east of the airport) to be able to drive just a short distance to catch a flight to — oh, I don’t know — somewhere, rather than drive all the way to Love Field or to Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport.

I haven’t a clue as to whether this bond issue will pass voters’ muster. Opponents complain about the increase in traffic, congestion, noise and assorted other issues related to boosting air travel in the area.

McKinney Mayor George Fuller, though, talks about the huge job creation and the enormous economic impact an expanded National Airport will have on McKinney and the surrounding communities … such as, oh, Princeton! He also points out that H-E-B grocers are building a store in McKinney and that, too, will bring lots of traffic to the city.

There. I’ve had my say on that matter. I won’t be able to vote on it. I just thought it would be worth mentioning that I am going to cheer for the airport expansion with the hope that it will bring greater amenities to the city I call home.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Retired teachers could get a needed raise

Remember that big surplus that Texas legislators found when they convened their session in January? Well, they have found a way to spend some of it … and the cause is a worthy one, indeed.

The Texas House of Representatives has approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would give retired Texas teachers a raise in their pensions. The House vote was unanimous, which given the state of partisan politics these days is a huge statement for sure.

The amendment would allow the state to move $1.9 billion from the general fund to the teacher retirement fund, thus allowing the raise to take effect.

This is a good deal for the retired educators who spend their professional lives seeking to educate Texas’s children.

“These people teach our children; they taught us,” state Rep. John Bryan, D-Dallas, said. “We have a moral obligation to them.”

Yes, we do.

Texas House increases pension pay to retired teachers | The Texas Tribune

The bill is set to go to a conference committee to work out the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. Let us hope the spirit of bipartisanship continues as conferees hammer out those differences and send the matter to the voters later this year.

Our retired educators deserve to be treated with the honor and respect they deserve.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Fog is lifting … slowly

Every friend with whom I have discussed this matter has said the same thing: Do not rush your way out of your mourning and your heartache.

It will take time for your heart to heal, they say. Yes. I get it. My heart is still broken from the loss of my beloved bride, Kathy Anne, to cancer not quite three months ago. It isn’t likely to heal completely … ever!

I am not rushing anything. However, I am happy to report to those who have an interest in this journey I have been taking that I am beginning to establish a bit of a rhythm to my new life and, yes, the fog is lifting … albeit slowly.

Some things still pierce my soul; they bring tears to my eyes. One of them is the sight of the headstone with Kathy Anne’s name on it. The monument maker this week installed it and I have made two trips to the cemetery to see it. I’ll leave it at that.

But as I go through my day, I am finding an ability to accomplish tasks with dispatch. I take time to laugh at a joke. I play with Toby the Puppy, who continues to provide tremendous companionship … and who continues to entertain me in that way that only devoted pets can do.

And I am able to write about her on this blog, an exercise that gives me a form of emotional therapy.

I can talk openly about my bride now, whereas doing so just a few weeks ago would reduce me to blubbering.

Is any of this a startling revelation? Of course not! It is merely my understanding and appreciating the knowledge that my life is changed forever.

This much hasn’t changed since the day Kathy Anne left us: I still think of her practically every waking moment of every single day. Maybe one day that will change. Just not yet.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

No pleasure in criticizing good folks

Let me be crystal clear about something, which is that I take no pleasure at all in criticizing the fine men and women who serve on the Amarillo City Council.

I just believe the council messed up when it foisted on voters a $260 million debt obligation in the form of “anticipation notes,” despite the undeniable fact that city voters had delivered a resounding “no!” vote on a bond issue to pay for the projects sought by the council’s anticipation notes.

At issue is the Civic Center renovation. Does it need to refurbished, expanded, modernized and gussied up? Probably, yes. Had I been able to vote on the 2020 bond issue calling for the work, I likely would have supported it.

But … I also accept the verdict of a voting majority who said no to the project. Which also is why I reject the move that the council sought to pull off by passing those anticipation notes, in effect going over the voters’ heads.

I don’t need to remind anyone that in a representative democracy, the voters are the bosses, not the people who represent them.

All this is my way of endorsing a Texas Senate bill that aims to attach stricter regulations on the issuance of these kinds of financing tactics. The Senate puts a five-year minimum on cities; Amarillo sought to shove the anticipation notes down voters’ throats in two years. It prompted a lawsuit by a local businessman, who eventually won his court fight.

I want to stipulate that during my many years living in Amarillo I was generally supportive of most initiatives that came from City Hall.

Not this time.

Timing, as the saying goes, is everything. Amarillo’s council was too quick to pull the trigger on those anticipation notes. The voters of the city clearly had not forgotten the decision they delivered in rejecting the bond issue.

The result has been that the City Council has learned a tough, but necessary, lesson about the government they inherited. It is that the voters clearly deserve the last word when it comes to spending their money.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience