Justice Sonia Sotomayor, an Obama appointee, has made most of her accumulating wealth from book deals with Random House or its subsidiaries. A sum of 3.6 million dollars over eleven years if the reporting is accurate. So, why didn’t she recuse herself in Aaron Greenspan v. Random House?
In the case, Greenspan – an author who was classmates with Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg while at Harvard – alleged that his proposed book about the founding of Facebook was rejected by Random House, only for the company to then grant a book deal to another author who copied his idea and then turned it into the successful movie “The Social Network” in 2010.
During that case, then-Justice Stephen Breyer, a fellow left-wing justice, did ultimately recuse himself due to receiving payments from the publisher in the past. Sotomayor, however, did not recuse herself despite doing the same thing.
That was ten years ago, so? Old news. Partisan garbage?
According to the Daily Wire, Sotomayor was paid $3.1 million by Penguin Random House over the course of two years; in 2010, she was paid $1.2 million by Knopf Doubleday Group, part of Random House’s conglomerate, and then received two separate advance payments in 2012, which amounted to $1.9 million when combined. These payments have made Penguin Random House her single largest source of income.
Getting 3.1 million dollars from the accused and then voting in their favor looks terrible regardless of the specifics of the case. And while I am sure she’s had more than one opportunity to explain it away, in the wake of the progressive war being waged against Justice Clarence Thomas, it looks worse.
In another case in October of 2019, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case of children’s author Jennie Nicassio, who sued Random House after the publisher allegedly began selling a book that was nearly identical to one of her own. In declining to hear the case, the Court ultimately affirmed the ruling of a circuit court which had ruled in Random House’s favor. Sotomayor once again did not recuse herself in the vote to decline Nicassio’s case, even though Breyer once again did recuse himself.
Justice Breyer’s recusal shines an unpleasant light on the Wise Latina. Stephen Breyer is no more or less a progressive jurist than Sotomayor, yet he had the integrity to step away from two cases where he had the appearance of potential bias. Sotomayor could not be bothered.
Water under some bridge, I suspect, but it is rhetorical ammo for opponents looking for something to toss back at the wailing banshees who will not leave Clarence Thomas alone.
HT | American Greatness
