|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
US Supreme Court packed with millionaires
By Kate Randall
17 June 2002
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
Recently released figures document the fact that the US Supreme
Court, an unelected body that rules on issues affecting the lives
of millions of Americans, is comprised of representatives of the
wealthiest layers of society.
According to financial disclosure reports for 2001, five of
the nine Supreme Court justices are millionaires, and the other
four are not far behind. These reports actually underestimate
the wealth of the justices, since they exclude primary residences.
Were the homes of the justices included in the financial reports,
it is likely that all nine would top one million dollars in net
worth.
The justices, who are appointed to life-time positions by the
US president, subject to confirmation by the Senate, are all richer
than the vast majority of Americans. Figures on their wealth were
released May 31 and reported by the Associated Press.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the wealthiest, worth between $7.7 million
and $33.7 million, excluding her home in Washington and some other
holdings. She also has retirement accounts worth at least $4 million.
Ginsburg has ranked as the richest justice in past years as well.
Stephen Breyer comes in second, reporting a net worth of between
$4.2 million and $15.2 million. This estimate does not include
Breyers home in the posh Georgetown neighborhood in the
nations capital, although he did list rental property in
the West Indies and real estate holdings in Massachusetts and
New Hampshire.
Sandra Day OConnor is worth $2.8 million to $6.4 million.
She holds a long list of telecommunications and medical stocks
and, like the other justices, often recuses herself from cases
that might impact her portfolio. OConnor is reportedly the
most frequently absent for such conflicts of interest.
John Paul Stevens and David Souter are also millionaires, with
Stevens worth $1.3 million to $2.7 million, and Souter worth $1
million to 5.1 million.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist is worth somewhere between
$510,000 and $1.2 million, not counting his home. Antonin Scalia
has a reported net worth of $500,000 to $1.3 million.
Only Clarence Thomas and Anthony M. Kennedy came in well below
$1 millionat least on paper. Thomas reported holdings of
between $150,000 and $410,000, not counting his home in suburban
northern Virginia. Kennedy reported cash holdings and life insurance
worth $45,005 to $180,000. He has reportedly divested major assets
over the past several years.
From the standpoint of compensation, all of the justices are
in the top 5 percent of US households. The chief justice takes
home $192,000 annually, and the other justices make $184,000.
Supreme Court justices, like other high-level government employees,
are required to account publicly for income beyond their salaries,
and disclose stock or other holdings that could potentially influence
their performance on the job. But the reports on the justices
holdings are vague, listed only in general categories, such as
those worth up to $15,000 or those worth between $1 million and
$5 million. While the justices are required to report these holdings,
they are under no obligation to divest them.
The justices are also required to list non-paid, out-of-town
speaking engagements at law schools and other law-related functions.
While they receive no monetary compensation, their hosts foot
the bill for travel expenses, hotel accommodation, food and other
perks.
The Supreme Court in recent years has consistently handed down
decisions in favor of corporations and against the rights of workers
and the poor. These have includedamong many othersa
June 1998 ruling attacking funding for legal assistance for the
poor and a March 2001 ruling upholding a court order for the Allied
Pilots Association to pay $45.5 million in compensatory damages
to American Airlines for refusing to halt a sickout. In February
of this year, the Court issued a ruling that effectively lifted
limitations on the drive by giant corporations to monopolize broadcasting
and cable television.
Of a piece with its rulings in favor of corporations and against
workers rights, this same high court has routinely handed
down decisions attacking democratic rights. These have included
rulings upholding the execution of the mentally ill and juveniles,
and rulings curtailing the rights of criminal defendantsweakening
Miranda rights and allowing for expanded powers of search and
seizure by police agencies.
In its most infamous decision, the right-wing majority on the
Court voted 5-4 in December 2000 to halt the Florida vote recount
and install George W. Bush as president.
See Also:
Most radical states rights
ruling to date
US Supreme Court steps up attack on federal regulatory powers
[17 June 2002]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |