Appointment With The Clerk Of Court To Calculate: Fill & Download for Free

I think it was calculated by Justice Kennedy, in the way that all Supreme Court justices try to calculate their retirements. I don’t think it was a result of bribery.Traditionally, Supreme Court Justices announce their retirements at the end of the Court’s annual session in the end of June. The only times vacancies occur at other times than this are when Justices die in office (as Scalia did) or resign for health reasons that render them unable to complete a session.Justice Kennedy was a Republican Supreme Court Justice, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan. Much has been made of the fact that he occasionally sided with the liberal wing of the Court on certain types of cases. He passed up opportunities to overturn Roe v. Wade, and he was a pivotal figure in a number of cases relating to LGBTQ rights.But in most other types of cases, he was actually very conservative. He wrote the majority opinion in Citizens’ United v. FEC which gutted much of modern campaign finance law by holding that restrictions on corporate campaign donations were a violation of corporations’ freedom of speech. He supported a more expansive view of the Second Amendment than the Supreme Court had historically maintained in District of Columbia v. Heller, and voted to incorporate the 2nd Amendment against the states in McDonald v. City of Chicago. He was one of the deciding votes in Bush v. Gore. He voted with the majority in United States v. Lopez, which promoted a far more restrictive view of the federal government’s regulatory power under the Commerce Clause than had prevailed since the late 1930s. He voted with the minority in NFIB v. Sebelius, holding that the Affordable Care Act was unconstitutional.None of that is to say he was right or wrong for voting as he did in any of those cases (that would be a different question); rather, his positions in those and a host of other cases prove that on most issues, and especially on issues surrounding government regulatory powers and the rights of corporations, he is and always has been very conservative.As a conservative Republican who was appointed by a Republican president it would stand to reason that he would want his replacement to also be a conservative Republican appointed by a Republican president. And he’s 83 years old and has been on the Court for 30 years. So the most likely times for him to retire while being assured of having a Republican replacement were June 2017, June 2018, June 2019, and June 2020. Of those latter two dates, June 2019 and June 2020, there was at least a chance that a Democratic majority would have taken over the Senate. This meant that if he wanted to be assured of a Republican justice being appointed by a Republican president, he’d have to retire in June 2017 or June 2018.He retired in June of 2018.There’s really nothing suspicious about it. It came as a surprise to many people because, particularly on the left and in the media, his advocacy of LGBTQ rights from the bench (which is a real accomplishment and significant part of his legacy) led people to believe he was overall more moderate than he actually is, and so they assumed (wrongly) that he would not want to tilt the Court further to the right (when in fact, EXCEPT on a handful of issues, the Court is already pretty right-leaning with him on it.) In addition, the same groups of people wanted to believe he would not want Trump to choose his replacement, because Trump is Trump. But Trump has basically outsourced all his judicial nominations to the conservative Federalist Society. Whatever Kennedy may think of Trump personally (and no one really knows the answer to that), Kennedy had every reason to believe Trump would nominate a fairly standard conservative judge. Kennedy almost certainly did not object to the choice of Kavanaugh, who is one of his former law clerks.So Kennedy retired exactly at the time we should have most expected him to retire. There’s no evidence of shady dealing here. That’s not to say that it wasn’t calculated; it certainly was. Every Justice who retires tries to calculate how their retirement will affect the choice of their replacement.

Just reading the first few answers of this question has me highly irritated. For many single mothers out there, child support is NOT a way to make a living. If two consenting adults have a child together, both should be responsible for that child. I am a single mother, I have a child support order against my child's father. I didn't do this out of spite. I just expected him to kick in something for the child he expressly was a part of creating and wanted to create. We live in different states and he has other kids. I always knew i would be a single parent and doing most of the rearing and paying most of the money. I wasn't expecting the world or 100% support. I just wanted some acknowledgement and a little money to get us by. I also decided the best way was to have a legal order so there was no fighting about what was fair.The first attempt was meditation. Had he shown up or at least made arrangements to call in, this could have been settled outside of court. He ignored all contact from the state.Second chance, also outside of court, was another attempt at mediation. This time he called in. He didn't have his documents ready, so the clerk chose to dely for 2 months.Third time came, different clerk. But he was so rude and dismissive to the clerk and me that the clerk was basically egging me on to do whatever maximum damage possible. I did not. I waived back child support (kid was about 9 months old here) and i waived back medical. They calculated his monthly dues based on a job he *might* have soon. This payment was under the percentage for minimum wage. It would have been under $150/ month with no back support at all. About 4 months later, i received a letter stating my child support order was denied and ordered to report to court by X date.Meanwhile, all the time, my child's father hasn't so much as bought a pack of diapers. I was struggling and trying to get on WIC and SNAP and working part time when i could. I had to make at least $2500 a month to afford daycare, pay off medical bills, get clothes and diapers, etc. So all this running back and forth to court appointments wasn't desirable. Yes you have an appointment time, but do they stick to that?? Nah.Ok, ordered to actual court, not my doing. Luckily, i didn't have to bring the child because they literally expect you to spend all day there. I got in with my sponser fairly quick. We went through the previous order. Several attempts were made to contact the father. He refused, so the clerks decide the amounts on his behalf. She upped his monthly payment to cover at least the minimum wage amount (still less than $200/ month), ordered back child support and half of any medical bill incurred since birth. A judge formally ruled on this case as such, and there it was!It's been over a year of that ruling and not one dime has been paid, offered, promised or even acknowledged. At this point, it's actually been almost 2 years. My hands are tied. Allegedly, they can arrest him for non payment. I don't feel bad about that. They can take away various licenses and things. I don't feel bad about that either. We could have settled this amicably outside of court. He chose not to show up. Nothing i can do about that now.

Here’s an outrageous story. This isn’t a story about how outrageously stupid the judge was. It’s actually quite the contrary.When I was in law school, I interned for a federal judge. I asked her to write one of my letters of recommendation to take the Bar in Massachusetts, and on this day I had dropped by to pick up the letter.So I show up to her courtroom, and there’s one hearing left. I don’t know anything about the facts of the case, but from what I gathered at the hearing, they were something like: A guy lost custody of his kid and had a restraining order filed by his wife/ex-wife/girlfriend/ex-girlfriend/baby mama. The restraining order would be dropped, and custody restored, if he completes anger management training.He goes and completes anger management training, and marches himself down to the appropriate state agency with his paperwork. He pays the fines or filing fees or whatever he needs to pay, he provides the certificate of completion from the program, all that stuff.The state loses all of that. They give him the run-around, and eventually it becomes clear to him that the path of least resistance is to do it all again. So he does it all again, but at the same time sues Massachusetts in federal court to recover the extra expense. He’s representing himself in court.After he’s done explaining all that, the judge turns to the state attorney. “Which of his alleged facts do you disagree with?”There was a lot of very inartful double talk from the state. Eventually, the judge asked, “Do you dispute any of the facts he alleges?” “No, your honor.” Livid, the judge asks… no, demands… “WHY HAVEN’T YOU SETTLED THIS CASE?!?”More inartful double-talk. “Well, your honor… I don’t have the authority t… you see, there’s a committee, and a decision has to come from th… I’m not sure when the next meeting is….”As it happens, I had also served as an intern in the state attorney general’s office. Without revealing any deep dark secrets, suffice it to say the whole process the state attorney stammered to explain was unfamiliar to me. And, apparently, the judge, who responded: “Don’t give me that! Is there a reason you shouldn’t settle now!? Are you not a duly appointed representative of the state!?”After a little more brow-beating, the attorney finally relented. So now we’re talking settlement.The judge to the plaintiff: “Sir, what are you asking for in damages?”The guy goes into his calculation, which is actually pretty reasonable: the cost of the program is so-and-so, he had to miss work, and he made so-and-so per day, he had to take a taxi, which is so-and-so. He wasn’t asking for a zillion dollars for pain and suffering, or punitive damages, or anything like that. At the end of the day, his total cost was something like $2,700. The judge rounded it up to $3,000. Back to the state attorney: “Is $3,000 reasonable? Do you dispute any of the costs he described?”“No, but…”“Okay, so you’ll settle this for $3,000?”Begrudgingly, “yes your honor.”But an on-the-record statement wasn’t good enough. The judge was feeling frisky that day, apparently. She says to her clerk: “Rex, go print me off one of those model settlement agreements. Let’s get this taken care of right away.”So, after continuing to brow-beat the state attorney, they have a settlement agreement that is mutually agreeable to both sides after a few moments. It’s executed.The judge doesn’t stop there.“Okay, when can this man expect his money?”“Well your honor, this has to get routed to the department of…”“You have thirty days.”“Your honor, I don’t know if it’s possible t…”“You have THIRTY DAYS.”Okay, that’s the end of it, right? The judge then asks, “anything else?”State attorney, obviously, says no. (I’m sure she had plenty to say, but none of it was really appropriate for an on-the-record hearing.) But, remarkably, now the guy has a problem!“Actually, your honor, there’s one more thing…”I’m completely dumbfounded, how this guy doesn’t seem to be able to take a complete victory and leave it alone.“What’s the one more thing?”“I would like an official apology from the state of Massachusetts…”Fuuuuuuck. The judge, however, handled it deftly. Technically, she’s a federal judge and doesn’t speak in any way for the state. (Even if she were a state judge, she still doesn’t speak for the state in any official capacity.) However, she makes a big show of it: “Rex, are we still on the record? We are? Good. On behalf of the state of Massachusetts, I apologize for the way you were mistreated…” She goes on a bit longer, giving a very nice but ultimately meaningless apology.Finally, the case was concluded, and I got my damned letter.