Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 358 posts

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#51

Post by 8note »

refurb wrote: post #5
rayiner wrote: post #3

This sort of leak, likely from a law clerk given that it was a draft opinion, is not a good development. Nobody has any loyalty to their institutions anymore. Every institutional loyalty has been subjected to team red or team blue.

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?

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#52

Post by sjg007 »

refurb wrote: post #5
rayiner wrote: post #3

This sort of leak, likely from a law clerk given that it was a draft opinion, is not a good development. Nobody has any loyalty to their institutions anymore. Every institutional loyalty has been subjected to team red or team blue.

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.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#53

Post by boringg »

ceejayoz wrote: post #31
humanistbot wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't read any major US news site regularly.

Why is it a “wow” that you find it here, in that case?

Or is it wow that Roe vs Wade is going to get overturned is surprising? It was always assumed when Kavanagh got on SCOTUS but people were hopeful it wouldn't come to that.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#54

Post by cocacola1 »

purple_ferret wrote: post #42
dragonwriter wrote: post #21

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.

Who cares. The supreme court has lost all credibility and has become just another political arm.

Insofar as I see it, the Court lost its credibility since Dred Scott.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#55

Post by sjg007 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #24
refurb wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This decision is disregarding what process? This is the power vested in the Supreme Court. Edit: No, no law is “settled” and impossible to overturn. The comment said “casually overturned”, not “never overturned”. It’s how it’s supposed to work You don’t get to pick and choose what decisions you like and then attack the ones you don’t. If you do you undermine the decisions you don’t agree with AND the ones you do.” An…

> This decision is disregarding what process? Stare decisis, aka precedent. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/is-roe-v-wade-settled-la... "During his confirmation to the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh convinced Sen. Susan Collins that he thought a woman’s right to an abortion was 'settled law,' calling the court cases affirming it 'precedent on precedent' that could not be casually overturned."

No post body was provided.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#56

Post by ceejayoz »

bruceb wrote: post #45
ceejayoz wrote: post #38

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.

It was explicitly banned in quite a few states less than twenty years ago, and Florida passed notable anti-gay legislation just last month.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#57

Post by altcognito »

zdragnar wrote: post #36
maxerickson wrote: post #13

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…

It could make the discussion about the leak, not the decision. It could soften the criticism of the decision itself.

Seems to be working quite well, I'd say a success overall.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#58

Post by giantg2 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #38
hindsightbias wrote: post #33

Unherd of before rulings, but this is the big one. But they’re just warming up. Obergefell v. Hodges, Affirmative Action… a lot of unwinding in the next generation. Remember, both sides are the same. /s

Lawrence and Griswold may be on the chopping block, as well.

I was just reading about Griswold. It was certainly interesting. I think I want to read the full opinion when I get time.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#59

Post by hindsightbias »

bruceb wrote: post #45
ceejayoz wrote: post #38

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.

No post body was provided.

Re: How rare is a Supreme Court breach? Very rare

#60

Post by vkou »

hammock wrote: post #35
eganist wrote: post #29

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.

Aka a chilling effect (a phrase invented in high court opinion) on justice, if unpopular

The SC has always taken public opinion into account when making their decisions. No 19th century SC would have ruled gay marriage to be legal.

Judges care about their legacy, and most of the time, most of them don't want a legacy of being the asshole on the wrong side of history.

Post reply on HN