Hacker News Reader

Comment by bnchrch | Hacker News Reader

I dont want to be the first to don the tinfoil cap but at what point can we assume that there are back channel pressures and corruption at play in the US Supreme Court. Which Apple is knowingly exploiting.

View on HN

We 100% know there are back channel pressures as we have at least one long standing well documented example of it.

https://www.propublica.org/series/supreme-court-scotus

Not a tin foil. Matt Stoller, one of the most important anti-trust advocates wrote on this [1]

[1] https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/bidens-bad-judges

Is of course possible. But IMHO this was the correct outcome.

We passed that point given the lack of disclosures lately

Your account seems to be shadowbanned. You might want to shoot an email over to the mods at hn@ycombinator.com.

I mean there is documentated evidence that Clarence has been on the take for decades so not very tin foil hat-y to assume this is happening with all of the justices

It's reasonable to be suspicious of the other justices, question their motives, investigate their finances and pass laws banning the exact kind of nonsense that Clarence Thomas has been accused of.

That said, I think it is absolutely tin foil hat-y to _assume_ that the other justices are just as bad.

>and pass laws banning the exact kind of nonsense

how do you then keep the Clarence Thomases on the court to not rule them unconstitutional and strike them down?

On the flip side, we know Apple pays bribes when it needs to do so

Previously on hn https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25190668

Reply on news.ycombinator.com