Sotomayor Ruled on Cases Directly Involving Publisher Who Paid Her $3 million+

Poor Richard Saunders said:
Grok claims Sotomayor ruled on a case that the USSC never even heard.

Grok >>> Stupid!!
Click to expand...

Can't read? Stupidfuck.


In 2013 and 2020, while receiving these payments, Sotomayor presided over two copyright infringement cases involving Penguin Random House, Rosiak reported.

Sotomayor voted on the 2013 case, Aaron Greenspan v. Random House, even though her colleague Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer had recused himself after also receiving money from the book publisher. In February 2020, the Supreme Court voted not to hear a case against Penguin Random House, which meant the ruling over the case was deferred to the next lower court, which had ruled in the book publisher's favor, Rosiak reported.


"Sotomayor's failure to recuse after taking millions from Random House is a lot more consequential than someone paying for a relative of Clarence Thomas to go to private school (which was not required to be reported)," GOP political strategist Matt Whitlock
 
Grokmaster said:
Can't read? Stupidfuck.


In 2013 and 2020, while receiving these payments, Sotomayor presided over two copyright infringement cases involving Penguin Random House, Rosiak reported.

Sotomayor voted on the 2013 case, Aaron Greenspan v. Random House, even though her colleague Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer had recused himself after also receiving money from the book publisher. In February 2020, the Supreme Court voted not to hear a case against Penguin Random House, which meant the ruling over the case was deferred to the next lower court, which had ruled in the book publisher's favor, Rosiak reported.


"Sotomayor's failure to recuse after taking millions from Random House is a lot more consequential than someone paying for a relative of Clarence Thomas to go to private school (which was not required to be reported)," GOP political strategist Matt Whitlock
Click to expand...

In 2013, the USSC declined to take up Greenspan v Random House.
In 2020, the USSC declind to take up the case involving Random House.

It is impossible to rule on a case you don't hear. It is impossible to preside over a case you don't hear.

Grok >>> STUPID!!!
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
In 2013, the USSC declined to take up Greenspan v Random House.
In 2020, the USSC declind to take up the case involving Random House.

It is impossible to rule on a case you don't hear. It is impossible to preside over a case you don't hear.

Grok >>> STUPID!!!
Click to expand...

SHE WAS THE PRESIDING JUDGE ON THE CASE. Yeah DUMBFUCK; she made sure it didn't get a hearing, as it was against her publisher.

She voted against appeals against her own publisher MORE THAN ONCE...while taking $MILLIONS FROM THEM,.


She should not have been voting on ANY CASE INVOLVING THE PEOOPLE PAYING HER $MILLIONS.


WHAT A FUCKING MORON.
 
Grokmaster said:
SHE WAS THE PRESIDING JUDGE ON THE CASE. Yeah DUMBFUCK; she made sure it didn't get a hearing, as it was against her publisher.

She voted against appeals against her own publisher MORE THAN ONCE...while taking $MILLIONS FROM THEM,.


She should not have been voting on ANY CASE INVOLVING THE PEOOPLE PAYING HER $MILLIONS.


WHAT A FUCKING MORON.
Click to expand...

There is no presiding judge on Supreme Court cases. There are 9 justices. They all hear the case if they agree to take it. They don't take 98% of cases that are appealed to the USSC.

In fact, the Court accepts 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year.
Click to expand...
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-fede...ational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1


Grok >>> STUPID!!!
 
Grokmaster said:
Dumbass; she voted against giving the case against her publisher a hearing at the SCOTUS...MORE THAN ONCE, while they paid her $MILLIONS.

STUPIDFUCK JPP LEFTIDIOTS...can't read.
Click to expand...

https://www.uscourts.gov/about-fede...ational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1

In fact, the Court accepts 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year. Typically, the Court hears cases that have been decided in either an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest Court in a given state (if the state court decided a Constitutional issue).

The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case.
Click to expand...

At least four other justices voted to not take the cases you are claiming Sotomayor presided over. Based on how the cases had no constitutional element to them, I would guess 9 justices voted to not take them.


Grok >>> STUPID!!!
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-fede...ational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1



At least four other justices voted to not take the cases you are claiming Sotomayor presided over. Based on how the cases had no constitutional element to them, I would guess 9 justices voted to not take them.


Grok >>> STUPID!!!
Click to expand...

SOTOMAYOR RULED ON CASES DIRECTLY INVOLVING PEOPLE PAYING HER $MILLIONS, and NONE OF YOUR DESPERATE DEFLECTION ATTEMPTS CHANGES THAT CORRUPT REALITY.

Were the other four being PAID MILLIONS by her publisher?


BTW- Circuit Assignments

It is ordered that the following allotment be made of The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of this Court among the circuits, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 42 and that such allotment be entered of record, effective September 28, 2022.

For the District of Columbia Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice
For the First Circuit - Ketanji Brown Jackson, Associate Justice
(Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island)
For the Second Circuit - Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice
(Connecticut, New York, Vermont)
For the Third Circuit - Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice
(Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virgin Islands)
For the Fourth Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice
(Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Virginia)
For the Fifth Circuit - Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice
(Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas)
For the Sixth Circuit - Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice
(Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee)
For the Seventh Circuit - Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice
(Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin)
For the Eighth Circuit - Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice
(Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota)
For the Ninth Circuit - Elena Kagan, Associate Justice
(Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Nevada, Northern Mariana Islands, Washington)
For the Tenth Circuit - Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice
(Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Wyoming)
For the Eleventh Circuit - Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice
(Alabama, Florida, Georgia)
For the Federal Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-fede...ational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1



At least four other justices voted to not take the cases you are claiming Sotomayor presided over. Based on how the cases had no constitutional element to them, I would guess 9 justices voted to not take them.


Grok >>> STUPID!!!
Click to expand...

Post #10. Have a grownup explain it to you, twit boy.


Keep your silliass dance of ignorance up; it's fun watching you twisting on the rope I set.
 
Grokmaster said:
SOTOMAYOR RULED ON CASES DIRECTLY INVOLVING PEOPLE PAYING HER $MILLIONS, and NONE OF YOUR DESPERATE DEFLECTION ATTEMPTS CHANGES THAT CORRUPT REALITY.

Were the other four being PAID MILLIONS by her publisher?


BTW- Circuit Assignments

It is ordered that the following allotment be made of The Chief Justice and the Associate Justices of this Court among the circuits, pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 42 and that such allotment be entered of record, effective September 28, 2022.

For the District of Columbia Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice
For the First Circuit - Ketanji Brown Jackson, Associate Justice
(Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island)
For the Second Circuit - Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice
(Connecticut, New York, Vermont)
For the Third Circuit - Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice
(Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virgin Islands)
For the Fourth Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice
(Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Virginia)
For the Fifth Circuit - Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Associate Justice
(Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas)
For the Sixth Circuit - Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice
(Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee)
For the Seventh Circuit - Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice
(Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin)
For the Eighth Circuit - Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice
(Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota)
For the Ninth Circuit - Elena Kagan, Associate Justice
(Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, Nevada, Northern Mariana Islands, Washington)
For the Tenth Circuit - Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice
(Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, Wyoming)
For the Eleventh Circuit - Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice
(Alabama, Florida, Georgia)
For the Federal Circuit - John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice.
Click to expand...

Grok >>> STUPID!!!

As I stated, we don't know the vote but since there was no dissenting opinion, the vote was likely 8-0 or 9-0 to not hear the case.

Circuit assignments don't mean they preside over cases in that circuit. It means they are they are responsible for issuing emergency stays for that circuit until the entire court can rule on whether to take the case and extend the stay. The entire court votes on which cases to take up. The entire court can also vote on any stays of lower court rulings.

https://www.scotusblog.com/election-law-explainers/emergency-appeals-stay-requests/

The cases you claim Sotamayor ruled on, there was no request for a stay since there was no immediate harm in those civil cases.
 
Grokmaster said:

Post #10. Have a grownup explain it to you, twit boy.


Keep your silliass dance of ignorance up; it's fun watching you twisting on the rope I set.
Click to expand...

Grok >>> STUPID!!!

Since you don't even understand what the word "presides" means, I don't think I have to worry to much about the twisted ropes you are strangling yourself with.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Grok >>> STUPID!!!

Since you don't even understand what the word "presides" means, I don't think I have to worry to much about the twisted ropes you are strangling yourself with.
Click to expand...

The best part is if you perceived this as a "liberal" court you wouldn't give a shit about any of this.
 
Grok lies and insults again. However, if Sotomayor actually did something wrong, the left would want her to resign. This is just another right-wing what about someone else ploy. Diversion is all you crooks have.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Just because you have no objective standards doesn't mean the rest of us don't.
Click to expand...

So you want me to believe if there were 5 "liberal" justices in the court you would be shining about this? Why do you people think everyone is as stupid as you? Is it because you're so stupid?
 
Grokmaster said:
While the Stalinocrats are frothing at the mouth because Justice Thomas has wealthy friends (gasp!! Oh the humanity!!), they ignore that SOTOMAYOR refused to recuse herself from cases directly involving her publisher.

In fact , SHE WAS BEING PAID WHILE PRESIDING OVER THE CASE(s).

That is what "CORRUPTION" is...


https://katv.com/news/nation-world/...ON (TND) — Amid an,paid her over $3.5 million.
Click to expand...

Shh.... Look over there! That one guy took a vacation and somebody bought his house!

You must also ignore $60,000,000 funneled to the Biden crime family coffers through 9 different family members. Because Orange Man paid his attorney, and African American man got some plane trips!
 
Yakuda said:
So you want me to believe if there were 5 "liberal" justices in the court you would be shining about this? Why do you people think everyone is as stupid as you? Is it because you're so stupid?
Click to expand...

You have already established you have no objective standards. Do you want to establish you have no intelligence?
This is about the false claims that Grok is making about how Sotamayor presided over a case that the USSC never heard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top