What? Some guy making a vague statement on a web forum with nothing concrete to back it is "direct, irrefutable evidence"? I'd like to see any evidence at all that any SCOTUS judge is actually profiting from this decision in any way. Chevron was corrupt 40 years ago; overturning it is not, or at least isn't more corrupt than the decision originally was in the first place.
Clarence Thomas? The huge amount of gifts he's taken from Republican donors who have ties to real estate companies and businesses that benefit the most from things like 'pesky environmental regulations' being weakened or removed?
