Jonathan Zell

Former Co-Executive Director of retired U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit Judge Richard Posner's "Posner Center of Justice for Pro Se's."

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

1/22/2026 NY Times article credits investigative journalist Mary Mapes for the recent posthumous exoneration of executed (but actually innocent) prisoner Tommy Lee Walker, who was railroaded by corrupt police and prosecutors. See
https://t.co/MoqAvataM6
Unfortunately, as is ALWAYS the case, the people who were legally responsible for preventing this injustice – the trial and appellate judges – aren’t blamed or even named! That is the same kind of “privilege of power” that Mapes wrote about in “Truth and Duty.” See https://t.co/Wn4hKyzawf

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

David French wrote one of his better NY Times columns today at
https://t.co/MOnxW9luer

where he explained how the U.S. has created "the dual state" in which ordinary citizens are governed by laws, while the government operates above the law. And, unless one happens to have a conflict with the government, one will never know about this parallel universe that operates outside of the law.

As is typical of many columnists, French focuses his "Who will watch the watchers?" argument on his nemesis, President Trump. But a much stronger case could be made out against judges, for the answer to "Who will judge the judges?" is no one! At least, Trump gets criticized and, thanks to writers like French, the public is well aware of Trump's immunities.

On the other hand, because newspapers don't publicize the actions of corrupt judges, the public is TRULY ignorant of the lawless judicial universe. So focusing on the legal immunities enjoyed by corrupt judges would have made a stronger argument and a better newspaper column.

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@DOGE @DOGE_GSA Is there a DOGE Affiliate for SSA? If not, where can I send my serious proposal to substitute a computer program for the ENTIRE Soc Sec & SSI disability bureaucracy, saving billions of dollars?

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@DOGE I have written a paper showing how the federal government can permanently slash millions of dollars of spending on bureaucracy every year without sacrificing even a penny of the government benefits it supports. To what email address can I send my paper for your consideration?

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@DOGE To whom can I send my proposal for cutting out government waste? (An email address is preferred.)

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@DOGE Where do I send my proposal to save hundreds of millions of dollars in federal spending (preferably an email address)?

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@AnthonyMKreis Why don't you talk about the obvious perjury committed by you-know-who?

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

All Senator Vance had to say was: "The 2020 election was not fair; had it been fair, Trump would have won. But it wasn't fair, so Trump lost." (It wasn't fair because the news media took sides, did not report the news objectively, and its opinion pieces were anti-Trump campaign literature that didn't belong in a newspaper.)

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

The parents of the alumni kids who got into the Ivy League and other corrupt colleges (Duke is the worst in this regard) paid supposedly "legal" bribes in the form of donations directly to the schools. The kids of alumni who don't get in didn't pay those bribes. It's time to outlaw these thinly-disguised bribes to colleges.

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@LimmyTalks Read "The College-Admissions TikToker Who Tried to Crack the Code" at https://t.co/t6ZSGv9vyQ. Daniel, the code is the parents (not the kids). Parents who can do something for the Ivy League school. Colleges are corrupt!

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@rickhess99 @Harvard_Ed_Pub Great article and great quote from Mr. Hess: "[College is] a racketeering situation." (And I would add: Whatever you learn you learn through self-study, not from the profs.)(https://t.co/DDXJmDief0

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@AdamUnikowsky Supreme Ct roulette (randomly picking 1 of the 9 Justices' opinions and having that decide the case) doesn't seem better than letting the 3-judge circuit court's decision stand. (3 judges are better than 1.) Except where there's a circuit split, I'd see no need for SCOTUS at all.

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@jselingo @WmBrangham @NewsHour Nothing will change. As long as colleges can weigh subjective factors the way that Harvard did (high scores for favored minorities; low scores for Asians), colleges will continue to be able to admit and deny whomever they want FOR COMPLETELY MADE-UP REASONS.

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@thehill @TheHillOpinion Prof Lubet is also the author of "Alito, Thomas and the Supreme Court’s culture of concealment," at https://t.co/08Z43fv3q4, where he claims that a judge's decision can be influenced by "subtle influences," such as the receipt of gifts.

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@SheldonforRI #3: Therefore, if one's goal is an ACTUAL corruption-free judiciary rather than one that merely APPEARS to be corruption-free (but isn't), then SCRUTINIZE THE JUDICIAL DECISION RATHER THAN THE JUDGE!

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@SheldonforRI #2: Similarly, if a judicial decision is dishonest — i.e., fabricates the facts of the case and misstates the controlling law (which is easy to ascertain) — then it shouldn't matter how ethical or free from conflicts the judge might be (which is often difficult to ascertain).

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@SheldonforRI #1: If a judicial decision is honest — i.e., faithful to the facts of the case and the controlling law (which is easy to ascertain) — then it shouldn't matter how unethical or conflicted the judge might be (which is often difficult to ascertain).

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@JRubinBlogger @SenWhitehouse Therefore, if one's goal is an ACTUAL corruption-free judiciary rather than one that merely APPEARS to be corruption-free (but isn't), then SCRUTINIZE THE JUDICIAL DECISION RATHER THAN THE JUDGE!

[Jonathan Zell @ThereIsNoLaw]

@JRubinBlogger @SenWhitehouse Similarly, if a judicial decision is dishonest — i.e., fabricates the facts of the case and misstates the controlling law (which is easy to ascertain) — then it shouldn't matter how ethical or free from conflicts the judge might be (which is often difficult to ascertain).