WHEN “JOURNALISTS” TALK ABOUT ETHICS, LAUGH IN THEIR FACES: Politico Aims at Gorsuch and Misses: Another ‘ethics’ hit on a conservative justice turns to dust when you dig into the specifics.
The confusion arises because Justice Gorsuch didn’t sell real property; Walden Group did. As Ms. Przybyla’s story acknowledges, the company’s sole purpose was to hold the Colorado house. After Mr. Duffy bought it, the partners distributed the money proportionately among themselves and dissolved the company. It was that transaction, not the property’s sale, that Justice Gorsuch was required to report, and did. The closest description for taking a distribution from the group is “sold,” which is why he described it as such. It would have been false to list Mr. Duffy as the buyer.
Does Justice Gorsuch’s compliance with the law conceal something nefarious? That seems implausible. “I’ve never spoken to him,” Ms. Pryzbyla quotes Mr. Duffy as saying of Justice Gorsuch. “I’ve never met him.” Nor has Mr. Duffy argued a case before Justice Gorsuch. Ms. Pryzbyla searched Mr. Duffy’s political contributions and found “that they went primarily to Democrats,” including Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and Hillary Clinton. Lawyers in Mr. Duffy’s firm have been involved in several cases before the justices, as counsel to either litigants or friends of the court. Justice Gorsuch sided with the firm’s clients in some cases and against them in others.
One openly partisan website characterized this revelation as a “bribery scandal.” Given that the purchase price was $670,000 less than the sellers had sought, it’s unclear who’s supposed to have bribed whom.
This is all just battlespace preparation for the fight after the Court strikes down affirmative action. And, longer term, for an effort to either neutralize the Court, or to pack it and take it over, whenever Democrats have the power.