Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Grease and glue

Grease and glue
Getty Images

Nelson is a retired American attorney and jurist who served as an associate justice of the Montana Supreme Court from 1993 through 2012, having been appointed to the court by then Republican Governor Marc Racicot.

The opening paragraphs of a September 1, 2023, article in The Atlantic magazine entitled, “What do some Supreme Court justices and physicians have in common,” by Adriane Fugh-Berman, a doctor and professor of pharmacology and physiology at Georgetown University Medical Center, recently caught my eye:


“What do some Supreme Court justices and physicians have in common? Both take gifts from those who stand to profit from their decisions, and both mistakenly think they can’t be swayed by those gifts. Gifts are not only tokens of regard; they are the grease and the glue that help maintain a relationship. That’s not always unhealthy, but it’s important to note that gifts create obligation. The indebtedness of the recipient to the giver is a social norm in all cultures. . .”

The Atlantic author goes on to describe gifts given to doctors by pharma reps that influence the prescribing physician’s choice of drugs.

But, my interest was in her description of lavish “gifts,” “tokens of regard” given to U.S. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito (and, in some cases, their wives) totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars. She also sets out the Justices’ implausible excuses and rationalizations for accepting such gifts—along with their incredulous, self-serving “it doesn’t influence me” justifications.

I certainly agree with the author’s conclusion that:

“. . . the decisions made by Supreme Court justices affect the entire country...those who would sway opinions for their own benefit must be distanced from those who make decisions that affect other people’s lives. The solution is easy, . . . All gifts, no matter how small, should be refused—or, better yet, banned.”

The solution is easy. All gifts, no matter how small, should be refused—or, better yet, banned.

Despite her conclusion, however, left unsaid, is the reality that “gift giving”—let’s call it what it actually is, bribing—is the ubiquitous way that the grease and glue of professional relationships continues as the status quo in America.

I can’t speak for any profession or forum other than my own, but as a retired Montana Supreme Court Justice I can say that all the Montana judges (state and federal) whom I know and justices with whom I worked and served with never were, and are not, at the end of this ubiquitous grease and glue gun.

Montanans receive from their courts fair, honest, impartial, and independent decisions based on record-based facts and applicable law. No greasing the skids or gluing justice in Montana’s courts.

Of course gifts are not the only forms of grease and glue that benefit politicians. There are hefty campaign donations and financial support and benefits for politicians’ and their business and religious interests, to name a few. When corporate and sectarian Montana benefit from lawmaking, they return the favor.

And, that is precisely why Montana’s Governor, and supermajority/Freedom Caucus legislators have launched attacks on our state courts. Why? So that they can ride roughshod over our Constitution and the rule of law. And, because our courts and judges, in doing their jobs, are the thorns in the glue and the sand in the grease that the political branches need to maintain their political power and favor with corporate and sectarian Montana.

These executive branch leaders and these legislators refuse to acknowledge our constitutionally-mandated system of three, distinct, co-equal branches of government, (Montana Constitution, Article III, section 1). Worse, these political branches seek either to control the courts to favor their own partisan ideologies and the businesses and special interests that support them; or, failing that, they seek to marginalize, demonize, and destroy our state courts altogether.

To this point, every judge and justice and every public official in Montana take the same oath of office, (Montana Constitution, Article III, section 3): "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, protect and defend the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the state of Montana, and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity (so help me God)."

Since 2021, the only branch of the Montana government that takes this oath of office seriously is the judicial branch.

Indeed, the executive and legislative branches of our government have demonstrated willful, abject disrespect for and noncompliance with this oath. Their go-to attitude is not “how can we comply with our oath, the Constitution and the rule of law?” but, rather, “what can we get away with to favor our party and those that support our maintaining political power?” “How do we keep getting the grease and glue?”

The political branches aside, at least we don’t have state or federal judges and justices in Montana in the mold of what we are witnessing by Justice Thomas and Justice Alito. Rather, we have honest, fair, and ethical judges and justices committed to their oaths of office and the rule of law who are not benefiting from or held together with the grease and glue of corruption.


Read More

Land of the Free, Home of the Capitalism Didn’t Fail America. America Failed to Moderate Capitalism
Monopoly's mr. monopoly in a graffiti collage
Photo by Artur Ament on Unsplash

Land of the Free, Home of the Capitalism Didn’t Fail America. America Failed to Moderate Capitalism

The signs are everywhere. For many Americans, buying power has improved only modestly despite decades of economic growth. Corporate profits are at an all-time high. We have reached a level of wealth inequality last seen almost a hundred years ago. By many measures, our capitalist economy seems to have failed to deliver broadly shared prosperity.

However, the failure isn’t with the free market as an economic approach. Instead, it’s our failure to regulate and moderate the free market, or more accurately, that we have spent 40 years undermining or removing the regulations of the New Deal that made our economy work for more Americans.

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman putting savings in a white piggy bank.

America’s economy now rewards asset ownership over wages. A policy proposal: a $35,000 Birthright Account for every child, and how it could be funded.

Guido Mieth/Getty Images

The American Dream Needs a New Economic Operating System

It is, by now, not an exaggeration to state that the traditional American Dream—work hard, buy a house, raise a family, and retire securely—is failing. It was built for a labor-based economy in which steadily rising wages allowed ordinary families to accumulate wealth. But America has become an asset-based economy, and ownership of those assets is extraordinarily concentrated.

Since the 1980s, the returns from capital have far outpaced the returns from labor. Inflation-adjusted wages for ordinary workers have risen only modestly, while the real value of equities has multiplied many times over. Housing, education, healthcare and childcare costs have soared, employment has become less secure, and defined-benefit pensions have largely disappeared. Even two-income households with respectable jobs often struggle to buy a home, build savings and accumulate enough for retirement.

Keep ReadingShow less
Man wearing Trump hat watches Trump on TV

Trump’s 10-to-1 rule aims to cut red tape, but fewer regulations can mean weaker food safety, Head Start services, and checks on presidential power.

Wu Xiaoling/Xinhua via Getty Images

Trump’s 10-to-1 Rule Gives the Presidency Too Much Power

We only think about the plumbing in our homes when something goes wrong. The same is true for government bureaucracy. Rules, procedures, and bureaucrats operate largely out of sight, making sure food is safe, Social Security checks arrive, workplaces are safe, and children with disabilities receive the services promised to them by law. Yes, there is plenty of red tape in government, just as an old house can accumulate pipes that no longer serve much purpose. But ripping out pipes simply because there are too many of them is not much of a plumbing strategy. Yet the Trump administration has made the number of federal regulations it eliminates a measure of success. That raises a more important question: When does cutting bureaucracy stop making government more efficient and start making it less capable?

1. The Case for Cutting Red Tape

Keep ReadingShow less