People who gave money to scam school run by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement can sue government

Originally published at:


I hate to be such a pessimist, but the Supreme Court will almost certainly decide that what ICE did here is perfectly ok, including keeping the money of people who weren’t the intended target of the sting.


It depends on how much certain Supreme Court justices are bribed I mean how much in “gratuities” the ICE agents imply they’re willing to provide the (in)justices after a favorable ruling.

Or should we give them a historical term and call such “gratuities” indulgences?


Yeah. Well the good news is that as horrible as that decision was, it only applies to state officials. There’s another law which explicitly bans both bribes and gratuities for federal officials, and that law was left untouched. For now.


It really beggars belief how brazen this sort of thing is in the U.S.,

These days it really doesn’t. After all, we had a con man who ran a fake university in the Oval Office.


Wait, you mean that when a regulatory agency not only oversteps their purview but breaks the law while doing so, SCOTUS won’t rush in to correct that injustice?

Oh My Wow GIF by Bounce


Well that’s a whole nother kettle of fish. SCOTUS has declared themselves the world experts on everything, so they will now decide all issues related to administrative agency disputes, whether the agency has overstepped its authority or not. Chevron is dead, long live…whatever the hell they’re going to call the current doctrine.


I think the new doctrine is “VENMO @CTOMMYRULEZ $100k for a verdict!”


Do you think Thomas and Alito would be offended if we asked them for a price list for desired actions by those Supreme Court Injustices?

  • Refusing certiorari costs X amount
  • Granting certiorari costs some other amount
  • Recusing themselves costs a much larger amount of money
  • Voting for the plaintiff without writing an opinion
  • Voting for the plaintiff and writing a concurring opinion
  • Voting for the plaintiff and writing the main opinion
  • Voting for the defendant without writing an opinion
  • Voting for the defendant and writing a concurring opinion
  • Voting for the defendant and writing the main opinion

If so, good.


Roberts wouldn’t let it happen. His constituency of corporate “persons” prefers information asymmetry whenever possible, and clearly posted price lists go against that ethos.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.