how does supreme fit 2020

Precedent plays an important role, true. That’s demonstrable enough: the opposite of conspicuous depoliticization is conspicuous politicization. IS it Epilepsy, or is it something else? There’s nothing admirable about avoiding such cases. For tees that are produced before FW17, refer to the last diagram for size measurements. As chief justice of the United States, Roberts's solicitude for the reputation of both the court he leads and the entire branch of government of which he is the figurative head is understandable. The brand produces clothes and accessories and also manufactures skateboards. “Two of Roberts’s consequential legacies will probably be the very politicization of the Supreme Court he sought to prevent, and a Republican Party that is likely to turn ‘No more Robertses!’ into a mantra — as it did ‘No more Souters!’ The chief will have no one to blame but himself.”. In this Nov. 5, 2020, file photo, the Supreme Court in Washington. . In contrast, strategic behavior flagrantly intended to advance an agenda often creates public suspicion — which may undermine the aims for which the strategy is undertaken. I may not hire you for a lot of cases I have. Someone should let Josh know that QAnon has hacked his account and is posting under his name. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. But then again my ideal use of the Supreme Court’s resources might be different than a lot of other people’s. Supreme Court says no to appeal of 2020 … Why the Supreme Court probably won’t help Trump’s reelection fate . If the constitution was always clear then we wouldn’t need a Supreme Court. | ... 2020, 8:30 AM EDT Comments 0. Supreme has changed the sizes of their t-shirts, t-shirts that are from fall/winter 2017 season thereafter fits bigger. . I’m right”. OCTOBER TERM 2020 . . lathrop is right….we do not agree on much. From the March 2021 issue, Nick Gillespie Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. Today, the brand has retail locations in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Japan, Paris, and London, in addition to an online store, famous … He decided his gameplan in 2005, and absolutely nothing can make him change course. Make up your fucking mind. In a hot mic moment, school officials were caught belittling parents. In a number of important cases in recent years, observers on both left and right have concluded that Roberts has engaged in strategic maneuvering: His goal appears to be to preserve what he takes to be the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, by disproving any suspicion that the justices vote ideologically or otherwise engage in political behavior. Depoliticizing opinions won’t increase their legal acumen, and until judges are smart enough to explain the law in a way that both parties can (however grudgingly) accept, rather than seeing the law as a craven tool of policy means, punctilious nonpartisanship seems a wise choice. Enact a fast track to impeachment for decisions. 2.19.2021 12:55 PM, © 2020 Reason Foundation | Is avoiding cases that are likely to be close objectively good as well? ultra liberal ally in GINSBERG. please do not use this sizing chart. Roberts understands that all-ideology-all-the-time would be counter-productive for right wing outcomes. The joint opinion's insistence on preserving the form, if not the substance of the rule, can just as easily be viewed as a surrender to those who have brought political pressure in favor of that decision. 2.20.2021 12:00 PM, Baylen Linnekin I assume you think that anyone who disagrees with you about the proper constitutional interpretation is an insincere actor. Its prestige will dissappear. Would you rather have a Scalia clone than Roberts? Yes, we urgently need to go back to the hallowed days of John Jay! J.D. Joe Kantz, the chairman of the Snyder County Commission and … NEXT: More Judges Talk to the Press About Timing of Taking Senior Status. ), “It was especially notable that Roberts had voted in the minority in the Texas case to uphold the restrictions, yet argued this year that the court was now bound by that case’s precedent.”. That and precedent over black-letfer Constituonal statements or over clear examples of justice/injustice is a terrible judicial philosophy. But to live in a world where your guess is as good as anyone’s is a place no right thinking person would want to live. You can’t politicize a Court by conspicuously depoliticizing it. The Supreme Court turned away the first appeal from Trump supporters to reach the high court, a claim by Pennsylvania Republicans. It's the result of our overly politicized culture where many people like to shame and destroy their enemies, but it is undermining the benefits of free and open dialogue. The Supreme Court’s ruling that the government botched how it ended DACA was a gift to President Trump’s re-election. By comparison, Roberts seems more like a politician than a judge. Truly happy with this stuff. Facts are that liberal justices vote more as a block than conservatives ones, and conservative ones get more liberal as time goes on and liberal ones stay the same. (And I only mention John Yoo because that’s literally the only authority they cite. Due to the spread of COVID-19, we have taken measures to ensure the health and safety of our customers and staff. Based on the ACA case… who frigging knows? Its a constant leftward move. But the truth is that losing weight is a good deal more complicated than you do not forget. Always wrong. I don’t even know why you’re anti CJ Roberts. He writes for Volokh so I assumed he leaned libertarian, but I could be wrong. Well I’m convinced! Lawyer. Hip-hop and punk culture have also adopted Supreme shirts and accessories as symbols of youth and independence. Macro Supreme Keto REVIEWS 2020 – Does It Really Work? All you do is hurl insults. I’ll see Vermeule’s “Durivage” and raise him one Albert Beebe White, Professor of History at the University of Minnesota in the late 19th c. Speaking of the role itinerant 13th century assize justices played among local networks of shire, hundred, and county powers (as paraphrased in Lyon’s Constitutional History): “The king’s justices were umpires, but the people had to play [the king’s] game.”. Google “Oscar Health” and you will find out. Below is a chart of the new t-shirt size measurements. If I had a button I could push to replace Roberts with Blackman, nobody could react quick enough to keep my finger off that button. Brett is correct. The whole thing seems perfectly sensible to me. I am tough on Roberts because of his arrogance.”. And yet last term they barely decided half that. “Hey, look at me!!!!! . I want them to take the most important cases where liberty is concerned, and where failure to take the cases will result in the most suffering by people at the hands of the government. No one disputes that Congress could do the ACA with a “tax”. Nobody. I completely disagree. And Roberts would cast decisive votes to reduce the number of right-left 5-4 decisions. Not anything I expect to see in the news. | I find it interesting that no one bothered to notice or as it appears here is fashionable, to jump upon and berate, “The joint opinion’s insistence on preserving the form, if not the substance of “the rule”|[Roe], can just as easily be viewed as a surrender to those who have brought political pressure in favor of that decision.” Is that cite-king? I’ve got my case won already. I’m not saying there isn’t political value to that approach. They’re wrong that CJ Roberts’ opinions demonstrate perpetual depoliticization of the Court, but I’ll spot them for the sake of argument. What's dropping? What I see is a CJ who consciously narrows the constitutional questions to be answered. Look at the “penaltax” he used to save the ACA. I don’t think it’s crazy to want Robers to vote according to what he really thinks the constitution dictates, with no eye towards political expediency. I think Roberts’ opinion in the Obamacare case can be understood in “judicial restraint” terms. Was the Reagan Revolution Really Reagan's? I agree with Josh’s assessment … Roberts appears to have no apparent ideology whatsoever, which means that he is governed by the vicissitudes of his perception of public opinion. Relocate to Wichita, KS. Accessibility | His job is to decide the case according to the law (whether Constitutional law or statutory), not change his vote for appearance sake. We use taxes to incentivize certain behaviors all the time. (“[S]o clear that he is crafting opinions with this end in mind…”). Perhaps that is what persuaded a number of Republican senators to conclude that Robert Bork was not fit for a Supreme Court position. 12.17.2020 6:24 PM. SCOTUS can only decide 80-90 cases a term. This, though, was genuinely breathtaking, coming from Blackman: “No. Americans are choosing jobs, brands, and friends for partisan reasons, say researchers. Disqualify anyone who has passed 1L. You call it denying cert, I call it prioritizing a scarce resource (SCOTUS can only decide 80-90 cases a term). Peter Suderman Instead, Roberts has husbanded his right-wing bias, deploying it carefully where it gets the greatest long-term return. Wrong once, wrong forever is the opposite of justice. TRUMP wins 2020 Election coded in Bible Prophecy !!!" We are assured in bold that “absolutely nothing” could lead the Chief from this bottomless pit from which he “cannot escape”. I also bought Nike tank tops and. By strategically holding the center of the court’s widening gyre, the Chief has arguably made the only possible choice in addressing cases that have percolated up according to the king’s game of national political divisions. Justices are not always reliable that way, but they have been in recent years. And he is only 50% done (assuming he serves to age 80, which would make a 30-year tenure as CJ) right now. Only a hack could have come up with that. But I think Roberts is riggt that in order to maintain its authority over time, the Court has to have a core jurisprudence that both its right amd its left wings accept as the Court’s. Good luck with that, the legal code is the ultimate in spaghetti, deliberately, because obscurity was a design goal. Commenter_XY and I are oil and water. Streetwear is a multi-billion dollar industry in 2020, and at the forefront of it all is James Jebbia’s Supreme, originally founded as a small skate shop in New York City in 1994. into a mantra — as it did "No more Souters!" AI replacing of judges is a good idea. Tuccille I do not have the measurements for size S and XL tees. 2.18.2021 1:59 PM. See, commenters? Shop SUPREME 2S Pro, 2S, S25, S27 and S29 skates today! Revolting. I can firmly disagree with a Ginsburg or Sotomayor opinion, but I know, and respect, why they reached the result they reached. Skaters, punks, hip-hop heads - the young counter culture at large - all gravitated towards Supreme. OCTOBER . If anyone happen to own the tees it would be great if you can help to make a measurement and comment below so I can update this chart. Let me guess . “transparent Machiavellianism” is oxymoronic. So Roberts reserves legitimacy capital for deployment in the kinds of cases which most empower conservative politics—while Blackman and others howl for his blood, because Roberts isn’t as doctrinaire, or as foolish, as they are about the culture wars. Judgebot 3000–now with the ability to strike a gavel AND keep a seat warm for 100 years while consuming even less energy than RBG!! Roberts, neither a left-wing nor a right-wing hack, saved the law with a construction nobody else on the Court found sensible. The president keeps insisting on the urgency of $1.9 trillion in spending. Steve W (27 Sep 2020) "!!! Exactly. | The election aside, using the law to politically empower the Republican Party is a far wiser tactic—and more effective long-term—than just handing Republicans a few legal victories in R-partisan cases could ever be, when those do not legally affect election outcomes. start ruling in a manner desired by an authoritarian, obsolete religious extremist like Prof. Vermeule or by a disaffected culture war casualty from South Texas? He lacked sufficient room in the margin to write it down. ... in the SUPREME COURT who becomes President , the Democrats just lost a critical . Brett, that is not the record I see. 2.19.2021 8:00 AM. Get rid of this Ivy indoctrinated lawyer in open insurrection against the constitution. Fermat had two accomplishments that day: his last theorem, and his first meme. I ordered a hoodie online for my 15 year old son (180.00). The problem with Roberts is that he is unpredictable due to no clear philosophy that can be fairly accurately predicted before a major ruling. Of course the conservative minority disagreed with the savings interpretation, since their goal had nothing to do with the law, and more to do with tossing the ACA. If you look at his record prior to the latest Trump fiascos, Roberts had never decided a political process case except on the side of Republican Party interests. A L fall hoody fits great on me but a L spring hoody is too baggy and leaves too much room. Yet because it is so clear that he is crafting opinions with this end in mind, the chief justice defeats his own aims. Heh, heh. | | Shrug. Objecting to the payment because Congress used the word “penalty” rather than the word “tax” doesn’t make much sense. Privacy Policy | I am tough on Roberts because of his arrogance. 2.19.2021 4:45 PM. It’s probably to late now. So was Scalia in Raich just following the Gallup Lodestar? His predictability comes not from a view of justice but one of trying to be pragmatically apolitical in such a way that it unmoored him from any foundational ideas of right and wrong outside considerations of very corporate-like issues of the court as an organization. From the March 2021 issue, Billy Binion That habeas action was dismissed because I had been “convicted of, or sentence to a public offense”, so does not apply. Maybe the loss of “legitimacy” ultimately hurts net justice more than I assume. If every time a new justice gets appointed, all the court’s major cases suddenly change overnight from 5-4 to 4-5 the other way, the court loses its ability to be a both a neutral arbiter of disputes and a trusted interpreter of the constitution. I may not hire you for a lot of cases I have. But I do think justices should prioritize making the proper legal decision in any given case over worrying about political fallout from making the correct decision. Not a coincidence that he was a lawyer/judge for his day job…. I am glad to read this wonderful article. I always want my work out gear to be perfect because it is the key to perform effectively when I am at the gym. How in the fucking world does that modify “political”? Truly amazing…and I think not right. Why refer weakly to what his opinions “appear[] to be” when they are so confident about what they are? But I can’t say that this is the objectively best priority for net justice. It’s sad and sick. family benefit breakdown main member main member + adult dependant main member + adult dependant + child dependant x 1 main member + adult dependant + child dependant x 2 main member + adult dependant + child dependant x 3 r10 … So they should prioritize cases based on the net damage a bad law could be doing, rather than on how easy it will be to decide the case. I always want my work out gear to be perfect because it is the key to perform effectively when I am at the gym. End our national agony from this totally out of control Deep State, rent seeking, big government, totally biased, little tyrant Supreme Court, with a Judiciary Act. Do you really think anyone in the Bush family gives a shit about preserving anything other their power?? Shortly after Blue June, I wrote "Roberts's self-professed humility depends on everyone being too dumb to see what he is really doing." | He is essentially a judicial version of “I was against it until I was for it.” And the “until” seems to have no basis in an analysis of right and wrong on the facts of the case but on the perception of the court. Go read the fucking definition of Machiavellian. Opening conference: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 . People can live under a law they disagree with as long as they can predict how it impacts them. Had he just ruled with the left wing on the ACA then the GOP complaint would be that he is a leftist as evidenced by his (in this hypothetical) stated philosophy. I think Roberts is right to be concerned about it. Why can’t you once formulate an argument of fact or of logic? Pure Evil. Supreme grew to be the embodiment of the downtown culture, playing an integral part in its constant regeneration. The individual mandate has been repealed…and yet the ACA is stronger than ever?? You may think it was wrong (personally I was ALMOST but not quite persuaded), but I don’t think it was corrupt or dishonest or whatever some of the folks who comment here think. Nor do we know if those who do are blackmailing him. No one thinks that is an apt description of his judging. (See pp. However, while listening to it again, the rest sounds more like what has occurred in 2020. 2.20.2021 8:22 AM, Reason Staff Thus, that became an exception in Roberts’ otherwise unbroken line of support for Republican politics. The essay begins: "The highest art is artlessness," observed Francis Alexander Durivage, a now largely forgotten 19th-century American author: The appearance of acting naturally, without calculation, wins trust and admiration. Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent, Josh Blackman “Roberts famously said at his confirmation hearing that the role of the justices is just to “call balls and strikes.” No one thinks that is an apt description of his judging.”. It is hard to believe that in this day and age, a company like Supreme can survive with such poor customer service. That’s wrong, but it’s by definition not following “bizarre” politics. Don’t let Tom Cotton speak for you. It’s not that hard to understand: He’s been driving up the percentage of 9-0 decisions by voting to deny certiori to important but hard cases, that were likely to result in 5-4 decisions. Is your argument that Josh Blackman is the least ideological person that exists, therefore if he is an ideologue, everyone else in the world must be too? The official website of Supreme. To the idiots in the WaPo article, maybe they should focus less on Alexander Durivage and more on writing like human fucking beings. I’ll defer to Justice Scalia to explain why laws should apply to other situations not SPECIFICALLY described in the law. They were uninteresting, but at least they weren’t desperate. I think fall hoodies tend to fit more snug cuz of the heavy weight cotton and spring hoodies fit the opposite cuz of the light weight cotton . Terms Of Use, Chief Justice Roberts has fallen into a "truly bottomless pit from which there is simply no extracting [himself]. But it wouldn’t mean, as an example, that Noscitur is an ideologue. There’s nothing wrong with or shameful about that, but nobody cares about him being “very tough” on the Chief Justice of the United States. As a customary opponent of right wing politics, I find John Roberts formidable and imposing. Justices don’t always rule the way we think they will once they are on the court, but they show their true selves rather quickly and a sense of predictability comes over the court. Just do what you think/know is right and forget the rest. . Even he couldn’t convince anybody this tortured argument is merely subject to enhanced interrogation techniques. “The Supreme Court further embraced an expansive view of Title VII in Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998), where Justice Scalia, writing for a unanimous Court, declared that ‘statutory prohibitions often go beyond the principal evil to cover reasonably comparable evils, and it is ultimately the provisions of our laws rather than the principal concerns of our legislators by which we are governed.’ Id. Correction…there *was* a way. That’s the problem. Is prioritizing cases that are likely to be 9-0 really the objectively correct goal of a S.C. Justice? Please note that this sizing measurement is only applicable to the normal supreme cotton printed graphics tees, which are under the "t-shirt" category on Supreme website. I would be afraid of remarks by judges in a tribunal about your nasty mouth. Supreme Court Calendar (October Term 2020) (PDF) - (Current Term) Supreme Court Calendar (October Term 2019) (PDF) Supreme Court Calendar (October Term 2018) (PDF) Supreme Court Calendar (October Term 2017) (PDF) Supreme Court Calendar (October Term 2016) (PDF) All Supreme drop lists of fall/winter 2020 inclusive price lists. Steven Greenhut In what ways is Blackman a conservative ideologue? There is no predictability in law at that point… which undermines people’s faith in the system. They’re cowed by the Wrath of Josh. Nobody has adequately answered why a penalty that is dealt with through the spending clause is not, for that reason and no other reason, spending clause legislation. He keeps digging, year after year. I am, admittedly, very tough on the Chief Justice. Otherwise, every murderer could just cite Cain to get off. SCOTUS has been partisan for a long time. he may have been influenced by a spate of commentary (including from President Barack Obama) warning of damage to the court’s legitimacy if the ACA were invalidated”. We include the audio in our 100 Cases series. The proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem proof finally published by Andrew Wiles it was 129 pages long – which definitely wouldn’t fit in a margin very well. I really wish Covid were over so at least we could get more travelogues by Prof. Blackman. Seattle Forces Beloved Takeout-Only Cider Bar To Close, Indiana Senate Passes Bill To Let Government Steal Stuff From People Suspected of 'Unlawful Assembly', School Board Mocks Parents Who Support Reopening: 'They Want Their Babysitters Back', Americans' Lust To 'Cancel' One Another Should Spark Soul Searching, Biden's Coronavirus Relief Package Has Almost Nothing to Do With the Coronavirus, Politics Is Seeping Into Our Daily Life and Ruining Everything, New Mexico Could Be the Third State To Authorize Lawsuits Against Abusive Cops Without Qualified Immunity. He entered this position fifteen years ago with a master plan: if there were fewer 5-4 right-left decisions, the Court will function better as an institution. Supreme “Vuitton” Crusher, 2000. It would be way worse if we saw only partisan decisions. Once the Court starts looking to the currents of public opinion regarding a particular judgment, it enters a truly bottomless pit from which there is simply no extracting itself. Report abuses. Will the authors say that conspicuous politicization by a justice would depoliticize the Court? In Trump’s election cases, the outlandishness of Trump’s claims combined with the size of Trump’s loss to forbid judicial intervention on Trump’s behalf. South Texas College of Law is literally so bad that they got sued for trying to change their name to get people to confuse them with a better (but still distinctly mediocre) school. Josh Blackman is a constitutional law professor at the South Texas College of Law Houston, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, and the President of the Harlan Institute. But the means he chose to accomplish those ends have broken the Court, and the way it is perceived. Given that the 2020 … And the argument is nonsensical. Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan, Scalia, and Thomas differed greatly, but their positions reflected a logic that the average person could understand. Washington rent seeking Deep State. Like others who comment here, I wish that he had ruled differently in some important cases. ", John Roberts's self-defeating attempt to make the court appear nonpolitical. His is a very consequential tenure. Perhaps, in the attempt to elevate my standing to sophisticant, so I might join this discussion of higher LEARNING. Please note that this sizing measurement is only applicable to the normal supreme cotton printed graphics tees, which are und I am not going to be as hard on Blackman then some others. Appreciate the shout out, lathrop. They stole one Supreme Court seat and broke their own rules to ram through a second justice. He may not even agree with me on Roberts. I hope the next post on this blog is some caterwauling about the 6-3 decision letting Trump exclude illegal aliens from census counts. But for … If you think Blackman’s an ideologue, well, then we are all ideologue’s then. This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. And W Bush proposed an amendment to outlaw gay marriage!! He is so locked into his ways that he cannot escape. 2020 supreme benefit guide. Nice! They have wonderful conviction rates or recovery states because they avoid the tough cases but the tough cases *are what you’re there for*. By striving so conspicuously to depoliticize the Supreme Court, he has brought about the very thing he hoped to prevent: No one has done more to politicize the court than the chief justice. I also bought Nike tank tops and sweatpants from a sale. Riiiight . I don’t think you can impeach law professors. While it grew into a downtown institution, Supreme established itself as a brand known for its quality, style and authenticity. I can also see some practical value in taking the obvious 9-0 cases, as they are righting an otherwise obvious wrong. One of the stupidest people in this country, but thinks he is one of the smartest. My new years’ toast: “Confusion to Trump Republicans!” Nothing could better advance that objective than putting someone like Blackman on the Court in place of Roberts. — Laura Bassett (@LEBassett) October 27, 2020. This is something that a lawyer or doctor would get. It is titled "John Roberts's self-defeating attempt to make the court appear nonpolitical." This is just becoming really sad and pitiful by Prof. Blackman. Hi, David. I honestly don’t know enough about Blackman to say where he falls on the ideological spectrum. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. . Follow him @JoshMBlackman. 2020 elections. Its members will be seen as nothing more than political hacks, whose “decisions” are mere ephemera overturnable at the next election, not to be seen as having any long-term binding effect. If what is charged against Roberts here is true (I am not yet convinced) then has is also violating his oath of office. Supreme has changed the sizes of their t-shirts, t-shirts that are from fall/winter 2017 season thereafter fits bigger. . On what social issues is he conservative rather than libertarian? Roberts has taken this to a new level. Jacob Sullum Ape. I usually go tts on fall hoodies and maybe a size down on spring hoodies . Roberts famously said at his confirmation hearing that the role of the justices is just to "call balls and strikes." There is no doubt that such clothing can be found at affordable prices too, you just have to be a little aware of the sale offers from good brands. But to rule how he did, with that pretzel logic, made the complaint not that he was a leftist, but that he was simply arbitrary. Two of Roberts's consequential legacies will probably be the very politicization of the Supreme Court he sought to prevent, and a Republican Party that is likely to turn "No more Robertses!" That is not what people want in a judge. Preserving circuit splits, instead of resolving them. Epileptic. . It’s a horrific thought, but maybe Blackman needs 129 pages to “rescue” Roberts….. Sticking to a coherent methodology when deciding? I found the post, and the comments about CJ Roberts very off-putting. Our Churches have been locked down for a year and disrupted, closed; people who had jobs, businesses, small businesses are unemployed or out of business entirely, people … I want SCOTUS to mostly protect the people from the overreach of government. Not because I disagree with his decisions. If Josh Blackman is an ideologue it probably means you’re an ideologue. Least of all the Chief Justice of the United States. But I am certain of this: When the history books are written about him, he will be seen as one of the most influential CJs we ever had. I thought that was the function of a CJ, to build a strong consensus amongst the Justices on SCOTUS decisions. Calling balls and strikes is what a robot will be doing very soon…so could a robot do the job of a Justice?? That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t take the ease of deciding a case into consideration at all. These include temporarily closing our stores in the U.S. and U.K., and enacting company-wide policies to safeguard our employees, products and supply chain. You and I probably would disagree about what the most important practical function of the Supreme Court should be. Stitches and concussion from fall, not caused by seizure. Skate faster, stronger, and harder with ultralight SUPREME hockey skates from BAUER. And then, he gave the government one, last meaningless chance to repair the statute. Newsflash: he’s a professor at a fourth tier school. Supreme Founded by James Jebbia, Supreme is an iconic streetwear label that has gone on to amass a cult-like following around the world with … An exclusive interview establishes the Pennsylvania vote has major constitutional problems. Chief Justice Rehnquist accurately characterized this dilemma in his handdown of Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Once they determined it complied with the commerce clause, there’s nothing else to address. Make it the size of a legislature, 500 Justices. The robot approach to law could work, but the laws would have to be subject to software validation before taking effect.

Jeff Kyle American Sniper, I Gotta Go Tik Tok, 2nd Regiment Royal Horse Artillery, Amazon Employee Number, Songs With Better In The Title, How Does Supreme Fit 2020, Jeff Gum Net Worth,