This never should have made it to the supreme court. Should have been stopped at the border ideally.
This never should have made it to the supreme court. Should have been stopped at the border ideally.
Wow they have a brain.
Wow they have a brain.
It's likely that they'll produce quite a bit of 9-0 even if not all 9 agrees. They are trying to show the Dems that the court doesn't need to be packed. The Justice might be compromised operators, but they know that the Court will lose legitimacy and binding power if it gets packed. For example, I wouldn't expect Texas to abide by a packed SC for rulings they don't agree with.
It's likely that they'll produce quite a bit of 9-0 even if not all 9 agrees. They are trying to show the Dems that the court doesn't need to be packed. The Justice might be compromised operators, but they know that the Court will lose legitimacy and binding power if it gets packed. For example, I wouldn't expect Texas to abide by a packed SC for rulings they don't agree with.
Interesting point.
Interesting point.
While this is good, I see this as 29 steps forward, 1 step back for them.
While this is good, I see this as 29 steps forward, 1 step back for them.
Why is this happening? Even the most basic shit ends up being 5-4. What changed?
Why is this happening? Even the most basic shit ends up being 5-4. What changed?
> Jonathan Turley has suggested that the Court’s recent string of unanimous decisions like this one may be a subtle message to Democrats, warning them against packing the Supreme Court. While Turley has a point, the Supreme Court often hands down unanimous decisions — yet these decisions do not often gain the same coverage as 5-4 rulings on controversial issues.>>
>> Jonathan Turley has suggested that the Court’s recent string of unanimous decisions like this one may be a subtle message to Democrats, warning them against packing the Supreme Court. While Turley has a point, the Supreme Court often hands down unanimous decisions — yet these decisions do not often gain the same coverage as 5-4 rulings on controversial issues.>>
Also they may be "picking their battles" where they know that one side doesn't have the votes, but doesn't think it's important enough to step out with a dissent.
Also they may be "picking their battles" where they know that one side doesn't have the votes, but doesn't think it's important enough to step out with a dissent.
I don’t know. Kagan’s opinion was pretty strident, especially for a liberal.
I don’t know. Kagan’s opinion was pretty strident, especially for a liberal.
(post is archived)