The moment news broke that the Second Circuit Court gave Tom Brady the bag-over-the-head punch-in-the-throat that was the denial of his appeal, I got a call from an attorney I know to connect some pretty connectable dots for me. And the picture those dots create once connected is not a pretty one for the Brady side.
The way the Supreme Court operates, the decision of whether to hear a case is divided up among the justices by region. Think of them like mob bosses, divvying up the city and no law business gets done in their territory without them getting a cut. And it just so happens that the northeast turf belongs to Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
That would be the same Justice Ginsburg who only last week said of Brady’s golf buddy/staunch defender Donald Trump, “He is a faker. He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego.”
By now you might be saying, “Well sure, Jer. You’re brilliant and handsome and know everything about how to please the ladies, but c’mon! No Supreme Court justice is going to decide whether to hear a case on the basis of trying to stick it to a presidential candidates’ friend.”
And if so, think again. (About the last point; you were spot on about the first three.) It is unprecedented for a sitting justice to comment on a politician in any manner. The whole premise of the Constitution is to keep the three branches of the government as autonomous as possible, and the courts are supposed to be the most neutral. Which means they almost never comment publicly about anything, least of all elections. Hell, they won’t even clap at State of the Union addresses, even if the president says he’s in favor of motherhood, liberty and kitten videos on Facebook.
Which is why Ginsburg putting Trump on blast stunned legal analysts. So it’s not too much of a leap to think she’d leave Brady twisting in the wind for the crime of having a “Make America Great Again” hat in his locker and refusing to say anything harsher about The Donald than he’d put a putting green on the White House lawn.
I know it sounds ridiculous and maybe even a little paranoid. But given the fact an issue about the PSI in a football is now 525 days old and one step away from the highest court in the land, since when is anything too ridiculous to be plausible? And why would any Patriots supporter NOT have reason to be paranoid?
If you still think I’m nuts, let me just add that the lawyer who called me might know a thing or two about how judge’s think and operate. He’s married to one.