Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
@judgeluttig Profile picture
@judgeluttig
May 17 • 4 tweets • 1 min read • Read on X
The full quote that I gave to @jodikantor of the New York Times was as follows:
“I have long said that Supreme Court Justices, their spouses, and their families should conduct themselves in all ways and at all times such that they are beyond reproach. The honor of serving the nation on the Supreme Court requires nothing less than this,
if the Court is to earn the respect of the American People that is indispensable to the public’s acceptance of the Court’s judgments. It is the responsibility of the Supreme Court to earn the respect of the American People, not vice versa.”
nytimes.com/2024/05/17/us/…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with @judgeluttig

@judgeluttig Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @judgeluttig

@judgeluttig Profile picture
Apr 25
As with the three-hour argument in Trump v. Anderson, a disconcertingly precious little of the two-hour argument today was even devoted to the specific and only question presented for decision.
The Court and the parties discussed everything but the specific question presented.
That question is simply whether a former President of the United States may be prosecuted for attempting to remain in power notwithstanding the election of his successor by the American People.
Read 19 tweets
@judgeluttig Profile picture
Mar 29
The Nation is witnessing the determined delegitimization of both its Federal and State judiciaries and the systematic dismantling of its system of justice and Rule of Law by a single man – the former President of the United States.
In the months ahead, the former president can only be expected to ramp up his unprecedented efforts to delegitimize the courts of the United States, the nation’s state courts, and America’s system of justice,
through his vicious, disgraceful, and unforgiveable attacks and threats on the Federal and State Judiciaries and the individual Judges of these courts.
Read 11 tweets
@judgeluttig Profile picture
Mar 14
Professor Laurence Tribe @tribelaw and I have written this essay on the Supreme Court's decision in Anderson v. Trump, which @TheAtlantic has just posted.
"Whether born of a steeled determination not to disqualify the presumptive Republican nominee from the presidency, or of a debilitating fear of even deciding whether the Constitution disqualifies the presumptive Republican nominee
precisely because he is the presumptive Republican nominee, [the Court's decision] represents a constitutionally unforgivable departure from the fundamental truth of our republic that “no man is above the law.”
Read 4 tweets
@judgeluttig Profile picture
Mar 4
My thoughts about the Supreme Court’s decision today, with CNN’s Jake Tapper just now.

The ruling is astonishing and unprecedented, not for its decision of the exceedingly narrow — and only — question presented
(though, significantly, four of the Justices agreed only with the “result” of that decision, and not with its reasoning)
but rather, for the five-Justice majority’s decision to reach out gratuitously and decide essentially all of the equally, if not more momentous, constitutional questions that would need to be decided
Read 7 tweets
@judgeluttig Profile picture
Feb 21
Alexander Hamilton wrote to George Washington in 1792. “When a man unprincipled in private life[,] desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper . . . is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity . . .
It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may ‘ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.’”
Thomas Jefferson agreed with Hamilton about very little, except for the danger of populist demagogues. “If once elected, and at a second or third election outvoted by one or two votes,
Read 5 tweets
@judgeluttig Profile picture
Feb 17
Yale Law Professor Akhil Amar (with Andrew Lipka) completes his analysis of the oral argument in Trump v. Anderson in this second podcast, the highlights of which are that:
Indeed, the Fourteenth Amendment does restrict the states, but not by preventing them from enforcing the Amendment’s disqualifications for insurrection against the Constitution of the United States.
Rather, it restricts them from not enforcing those disqualifications. It restricts them from electing oath-breaking insurrectionists to state office. It restricts them from choosing oath-breaking insurrectionists as electors for the presidency.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(