61–70 of 358 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd venture it was deemed "worth it" just like the absurd amount of leaks just after Jan 20, 2017. In this case, it's possible that an intentional leak of a draft is aimed to encourage politicians and activists alike to ~~threaten~~encourage various Justices to change their minds before the final decision, ala ACA/Roberts
This could just as likely to be to distract from something petty but embarrassing about to drop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The leak could have been done by someone who favors the draft.
That is extremely unlikely. There's nothing to be gained by breaking the trust of the supreme court justices by leaking a draft of a decision you are in favor of. Now, the justices will be facing intense public discontent from those who want a different decision to be made before the draft is finalized (not that I suspect anything can realistically be changed at this point). If you favor the decision, then it also sp…
When members do not have a way to change their opinion and save face, they won't change their opinion.
Politico should have been more thoughtful about its disclosure if they preferred to see changes because now the names on that opinion will never change and we could very well see the exact language become the published opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lawrence and Griswold may be on the chopping block, as well.
No. No state is going after that. People don't care enough. There are not significant anti gay sex groups.
SCOTUSblog’s Twitter has an on point take on the significance of the leak within the Court: https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1521295411545260035?t=... It’s impossible to overstate the earthquake this will cause inside the Court, in terms of the destruction of trust among the Justices and staff. This leak is the gravest, most unforgivable sin.
I'm not at all surprised. Though I wonder if the risk of leaks going forward might act as a normalizing force on "hot take" court opinions (in either direction). I'm looking forward to a post-leak Supreme Court, at least for now. I can't foresee negative outcomes yet so I'm open to a counter-thought to the one I presented above.
SCOTUSblog’s Twitter has an on point take on the significance of the leak within the Court: https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1521295411545260035?t=... It’s impossible to overstate the earthquake this will cause inside the Court, in terms of the destruction of trust among the Justices and staff. This leak is the gravest, most unforgivable sin.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the bigger problem. There is a process and some people seem to think circumventing it is the right response. The courts will make a decision and then it's up to Congress to draft new laws if it wants. Undermining the process of the judicial branch is not going to end well at all.
The current court is made up of members in their position by ignoring process. Does the process still matter?
Government is ignoring processes and right at all levels to some degree. I sympathize with the idea that rule of law has become a joke since nobody can enforce it on the people in power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the bigger problem. There is a process and some people seem to think circumventing it is the right response. The courts will make a decision and then it's up to Congress to draft new laws if it wants. Undermining the process of the judicial branch is not going to end well at all.
If the Supremes overturn Roe vs Wade they will lose all of the legitimacy they’ve spent the last 70 years building. At that point the Court itself is fubar. It probably already is fubar since Trump anyway. Clarence Thomas and his wife’s Jan 6th involvement is just the cherry on top of a shit show. In the end they are falliable humans like the rest of us so perhaps we hold too high an opinion.
Roe is so bad that it has long united libertarian conservatives (who hate it because it makes up a right out of thin air) and social conservatives (who had abortion on the merits).
In addition to that it manages to be wildly out of line with international norms, which:
1) Generally recognize abortion as an issue for the legislature.
2) Typically draw the line for elective abortions at the end of the first trimester, not viability. The abortion laws in Denmark, Germany, Italy, France, and Spain would be unconstitutional under Roe.
Abortion will still be legal as a practical matter. Some people might have to travel to the next state over, of course.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not at all surprised. Though I wonder if the risk of leaks going forward might act as a normalizing force on "hot take" court opinions (in either direction). I'm looking forward to a post-leak Supreme Court, at least for now. I can't foresee negative outcomes yet so I'm open to a counter-thought to the one I presented above.
The court works on their opinions in public silence for months, what "hot take" court opinions are you talking about?
The subject of public discourse at this hour.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abort...