imaginary cases, there is no logical stopping point. that s one of the reasons our founders insisted on such a strict acquirement of there being an actual case, an actual controversy before going to the u.s. supreme court. i want to shift to the other big issue that s before the court, ethics. it s propublica has broken some reporting about justice clarence thomas, and samuel alito, except in these luxury items, these big trips for real estate tycoons, and billionaires. why do you think the chief justice, john roberts, should be doing at this point? and the process of assessing that, does it look like he s lost control of his court on this issue? yeah. sorry, michael, i m here to talk about the case. i can t get into that stuff. no, i m not an ethicist, among other things. that s above and different than my pay grade. fair point.
troubles might be coming his way over the next few months, he s used his campaign rallies to air out his grievances, and rather than focus his efforts on his legal defense and actually trying to find a lawyer who is going to represent him, he s chosen to litigate his case on the campaign trail instead. yesterday, trump made a stop in pickens, south carolina, a small sleepy town near the blue ridge mountains that has a population of about 3000. he was supposedly there to campaign, but mainly, he was there to complain. a former president spent roughly 90 minutes on stage, spewing out disinformation about his legal predicament, and vowing to take revenge against those he considers his political enemies. when i get back in office, i will appoint a real special prosecutor to investigate every detail of the biden crime family of corruption. [applause] [crowd chanting] so incredible.
case before the supreme court this term. so neil, i want to pick up on the point that you made before we went to break. i think it s an important one, and probably a little delicate as you know. this idea that not just supreme court, but any court akin and hearing a hypothetical case. how often is that done, and i guess if it has the kind of impact that this particular case had, is this something that the supreme court should review. how is that process play out? it s not supposed to ever be done. the supreme court has a procedure to seek we hear, rain so to say supreme court, hey, there s a new fact that submerged, and we need you to revisit your ruling, that s possible. the supreme court can also, on its, don t ask for a briefing on this question on whether this ace is made up. conservatives are defending the
in fact, now we know the individual she s referring to is having approached her is not guy, is married. again, had not asked, or even if he weren t those other things, had not asked her to design a website for him, because he s a website designer. this case reeks of the thing that should be concerning to all of us, and that is the consequences of the case, of the supreme court taking hypothetical cases, and drawn constitutional law from it. what s your take? first of all, hats off to melissa formation reporting. this shoe level reporting is exactly what we need more of. really, it s an amazing story on the other hand, our founders an article three so you have to have an actual case or controversy in order to go to the united states supreme court and seek relief.
it is in fact a web designer. this is what he does. what other interesting details did you find out that makes the story feel so questionable from the very beginning? stuart was a really nice guy. i mean, i call a lot of strangers over the course of my job, he is by far one of the most pleasant wants to be called to given the severity of the information. just to give him credit for that, he may be and one of the strangest situations i think a person can find themselves in. you are now included in this landmark supreme court case that you didn t know about until three days ago. you know, he did say that he had heard of the case last december, not at all anything that was going to happen to him, but because he said what designer, it was in conversation. this is a pretty small community. they were sharing the case in the context of, wow, our industry is now being implicated in what could be an anti lgbtq decision. we need to think about how this