'Shore is Funny Supreme Courtcan't buy their own body guards when Rudy Cla

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/92439-supreme-court-wants-more-money-for-security

This is hysterical...

Supreme Court wants more money for security concerns
By Russell Berman - 04/15/10 12:00 PM ET
The Supreme Court is asking for more federal security funds, citing as one reason the “volume” of threats it receives.

Justice Clarence Thomas told a House appropriations subcommittee on Thursday that the court wants money for 12 additional police officers, although security personnel want 24 ideally. Thomas said the court was considering the nation’s broader fiscal difficulties in asking for only 12.

He said the court has only one person dedicated to threat assessment.

“We are going to upgrade that because of the volume,” Thomas said in testimony on the Supreme Court’s annual budget request. The justice was responding to a question from Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.), who cited recent incidents in which individuals have targeted federal buildings, including IRS offices.


Members of Congress have also come under threats since President Barack Obama signed the healthcare bill into law. Members of both parties, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Republican House Whip Eric Cantor (Va.), have been targeted.


Thomas said the court was making the request “with some reluctance” but that the court’s security personnel felt a strong need after conducting a review. The review came after the justices were asked specifically about security needs at last year’s funding hearing.

Most of the new officers would be used to secure areas of the court building and grounds that will be newly opened to the public following completion of its renovation.

“We understand this is a period of austerity,” Thomas said in outlining the court’s $77 million overall budget request, which included an increase of 5 percent from the previous year.

“I emphasize the word ‘needs,’” he said. “We do not look at this as wants or a wish list.”

Thomas, a member of the court’s conservative wing since his appointment in 1990, has become a regular presence at the annual appropriations hearing, ever since former Chief Justice William Rehnquist first asked him to represent the court during the 1990s.


“I may well be the longest-serving member of this committee,” he quipped at the outset of his testimony. “Maybe I’ll get off for good time, or good behavior.”

Justice Stephen Breyer, a member of the court’s liberal wing, appeared alongside Thomas. The justices discussed a range of issues related to the federal judiciary, with the notable exception of any actual cases, which the lawmakers recognized as off limits.

At one point, Thomas became involved in a tense exchange with Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who pressed the justice on the lack of diversity among the Supreme Court’s prestigious clerkships.

Lee, the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, asked if the court had made any effort to attract clerks from minority groups and particularly from law schools outside of the Ivy League. Thomas responded that while he looks for clerks from a wide range of schools, the justices start from a pool of candidates that have clerked for other federal appellate courts.

Within that pool, Thomas said, “Hispanics and blacks do not show up in any great numbers.”

When Lee asked how the justices could increase the pool, Thomas demurred. “I don’t think it’s up to us to increase the pool,” he said.


The answer did not satisfy Lee, who brought up Thomas’s votes against affirmative action during his time on the bench.
“What’s in the pool has to do unfortunately with some of your decisions on the Supreme Court that have really shut out any people of color in some of these institutions,” she said. Thomas did not respond directly, but he voiced support for having a staff that reflected a broad range of experiences and regions.

Breyer was also asked by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) about the prospect of opening the high court to cameras for the first time. The justice backed a pilot program for cameras in lower federal courts, but he said it would take a while before a “comfort level” is reached to allow Supreme Court proceedings to be televised.


“How to get to that comfort level is going to be a long, complicated matter,” he said. “Eventually we’ll get to the comfort level, but we’re not there yet.”

He warned that once cameras are allowed in, “there’s no going back.”

Schiff replied that the only way the justices would reach that point of comfort would be “by taking the plunge.”


This story was posted at 12 p.m. and updated at 12:47 p.m.

Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/92439-supreme-court-wants-more-money-for-security
The contents of this site are 2010 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsisiary of News Communications, Inc.
Hey, Thomas, call Rudy Clay...you'll get advice on how to purchase a hummer and six body guards.

Hysterical! Thomas is Black! Oh our gov't is so depressing, even with the millions they make, the Supreme Court can't afford their own body guards when Rudy Clay from a depressed city CAN?

Maybe the Supreme Court should hire Rudy as their consultant, even though he's afraid of dead alligators.

Our country is a joke since Obama took over....it's sad...it's not funny; sad.

Actually, Rudy can't afford the security. Like so many others, he's spending with no idea how to pay the bill.