charonn0
It will vary by state, but generally:
When only one of the two parties is unwilling to continue the employer-employee relationship, it is obvious who is the moving party. If employment was still available to the claimant and the claimant refused to continue working, then the claimant is the moving party. If the employer will not allow the claimant to continue work, even though the claimant wants to, then the employer is the moving party.
A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.
https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges
Not that SCOTUS is held to the same code of conduct that all other federal judges are held to, of course.
Flowering and fruiting plants generally need bees, birds, etc. for pollination and seed spreading.
At least twice before, Thomas has similarly defended his failure to make required disclosures as an unintentional error or a misunderstanding of the rules.
Seems like the only possible explanations are that he's lying or he's incompetent.
Or, 1/50th the death rate of the general US population.
10 deaths versus 4.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics....
How do people fall for this guy's lies? He's not even good at it...
Her continued presence on the bench, not just on this one case, is fatally undermining the already tenuous legitimacy of the federal judiciary.
I wouldn't willingly live anyplace else.