SCOTUS bought off? You gotta wonder!

...........................................
 UPDATES about Clarence Thomas' ethics below!
..........................................
Class Dismissed The Supreme Court decides that the women of Wal-Mart can't have their day in court.
By Dahlia Lithwick, Posted Monday, June 20, 2011
Today the Supreme Court decided what may well be the most consequential case of the current term, Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sweeping class action suit filed almost 10 years ago that has yet to be litigated on its merits. Filed on behalf of the more than 1.5 million women who have worked at Wal-Mart since 1998, the suit alleges that the company favored men over women in decisions about pay and promotion in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Today, the Supreme Court told them all to go home.

Writing for the court's five conservatives—and all but one of its men—Justice Antonin Scalia found that the women seeking to be certified as a single class did not have enough in common to go forward with the lawsuit en masse. Wal-Mart, the nation's largest private employer, seems to have figured out that the key to low-cost discrimination lies in discriminating on a massive scale. In Scalia's words, all these disparate women with their multiple claims about "millions of employment decisions" lacked sufficient "glue" to be permitted to move forward together.

A lot of critics are saying that this decision has created a new rule: Some companies are simply too big to sue. But that's only half the story. The other half is that in the court's eyes, sex discrimination is simply too pervasive to be a problem.

[snipped]

This isn't the first time this term that the court has narrowed the scope of class action litigation. And it isn't the first time the justices have ignored the evidence—and, worse yet, passed judgment on facts not yet in evidence—in an ongoing effort to prove that the only discrimination that can ever be remedied is the kind that comes right at you with a big blue sign and a greeter.
..........................................
UPDATES:
To the Supreme Court money is justice
[snipped]
In fact they [the justices] have voted 5-4 in favor of big corporations every single time a law suit against a corporation reaches the Supreme Court. It certainly does more than defy the law of probability that every single time someone files a suit against a corporation Justice Antonin Scalia can invent some judicial principle that makes the suit groundless. ...
[snipped]
... Scalia, Alito and most of all Clarence Thomas appear more like partisan hacks than justices for the highest court in America. All three have attended Republican fund raisers and have helped raise money for Republican and Right Wing causes according to Think Progress.
[snipped]
Probably the largest conflict of interest is yet to come however and if Clarence Thomas does not recuse himself I think it would be time to start demanding his impeachment. His wife has recieved lots of money to lobby against Obama's Affordable Health Care Act. This bill has been pushed from many directions by Conservatives so they can get it before the Supreme court for another 5-4 decision making it Unconstitutional. Thomas refusal to recuse himself already tells you the fix is in.
[snipped]
..........................................
Justice for sale or rent
Justice Clarence Thomas received a gift worth $15,000 from the American Enterprise Institute. He voted in their favor in three U.S. Supreme Court cases. Given his rigid right-wing orthodoxy, it's fair to argue that Thomas didn't need to be purchased. He still shouldn't be taking expensive gifts from people who make arguments before him.
[snipped]
..........................................