« OK, Then Here's The Next Question | Main | Saturday Music Post - You've Really Got a Hold on Me »
Friday, August 16, 2024
Well, Here's One Answer
[A] Justice cannot speak on behalf of the Court for, say. an entire Term. The Justice can still sit and write separately. . . . I ask because this is the only sanction that strikes me as lawful and somewhat significant.
Even if constitutional, it would be impossible to prevent the other majority justices from joining the sanctioned justice's opinion.
But a more effective sanction might be eliminating a clerkship for a term, which has the additional benefit of being enforceable by Congress's appropriation (that is, non-appropriation) without relying on cooperation from the Court.
Posted by Steve Lubet on August 16, 2024 at 12:53 PM | Permalink
Comments
I doubt that a volunteer clerk would be permissible under the relevant law. There would certainly be confidentiality issues. In any case, the statute and appropriation could be structured to prohibit a subsequent bonus.
Not saying this is a good idea. Just saying that it might be possible.
Posted by: Steve L. | Aug 16, 2024 3:22:23 PM
What if the clerk works for free and then receives an "extra" bonus from someone the next year?
Posted by: Gerard | Aug 16, 2024 3:12:30 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.