The Big Difference
by tristero
From dsnodgrass at La Vida Locavore:In Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms, No. 09-475, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case which could have an enormous effect on the future of the American food industry. This is Monsanto's third appeal of the case, and if they win a favorable ruling from the high court, a deregulated Monsanto may find itself in position to corner the markets of numerous U.S. crops, and to litigate conventional farmers into oblivion.
Here's where it gets a bit dicier. Two Supreme Court justices have what appear to be direct conflicts of interest.
Stephen Breyer
Charles Breyer, the judge who ruled in the original decision of 2007 which is being appealed, is Stephen Breyer's brother, who apparently views this as a conflict of interest and has recused himself.
Clarence Thomas
From the years 1976 - 1979, Thomas worked as an attorney for Monsanto. Thomas apparently does not see this as a conflict of interest and has not recused himself.
Fox, meet henhouse.
And there it is, one main difference between normal Americans and movement conservatives.
If Thomas had even the slightest notion of what American values were, he would have recused himself, as he should have from an earlier decision involving a Monsanto competitor.
Special Note to those who would be foolish enough to argue that 30 plus years is surely long enough: It's not. I have close friends who I worked with 30 years ago and we're still in touch. It defies all reason to imagine Thomas has completely cut all his ties to Monsanto or, at the very least, former employees. There is no way even someone who was not suffering from Clarence Thomas's disturbingly high levels of rage and egomania could be objective in this situation.
Follow the link above for the details on the case.