General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAssigning Alito is Thomas's revenge for his wife being exposed as an insurrectionist. nt
gab13by13
(20,876 posts)Alito is worse than Thomas.
agingdem
(7,759 posts)the Ginni Thomas thing...anti-birth control, anti-abortion, anti-health care, anti-gun control, anti-gay marriage...he is pro-big business, does not believe in separation of church and state..he's stand-alone vile..
Walleye
(30,729 posts)hlthe2b
(101,730 posts)sl8
(13,584 posts)That would be the Chief Justice, if he's in the majority.
Ocelot II
(115,280 posts)sl8
(13,584 posts)Ocelot II
(115,280 posts)but not for overturning Roe altogether.
sl8
(13,584 posts)milestogo
(16,829 posts)Thomas really doesn't do anything that takes initiative.
themaguffin
(3,805 posts)onenote
(42,383 posts)When the Court meets in conference after oral argument, they take a vote on the outcome of the case, not the reasoning behind that outcome. In all likelihood, that resulted in a 6-3 vote to uphold the Mississippi law. Roberts would then assign the opinion. After that, a draft opinion is circulated and then concurring and dissenting opinions are circulated.
Roberts doesn't have to support the reasoning in Alito's opinion. He can concur in the outcome -- upholding the Mississippi law -- on narrower grounds in a concurring opinion. But he's still in the "majority".
June Medical Services v. Russo is an example. The Court struck down a Louisiana abortion statute 5-4 with Breyer writing the opinion. But only four justices agreed with Breyer's reasoning. Roberts provided the fifth vote to uphold the statute - but on completely different grounds. He didn't sign onto the Breyer opinion, but without his concurrence, there would only have been four votes to strike down the statute. So he was part of the majority and he was the one to assign the opinion.
LetMyPeopleVote
(144,005 posts)This opinion is so extreme that I doubt Roberts is voting with the majority
onenote
(42,383 posts)The fact that he may file a concurring opinion stating narrower grounds for that outcome doesn't mean that he's not part of the majority.
Indeed, when the Court meets following oral argument, they vote on the outcome of the case: affirm or reverse. They don't vote on the underlying reasoning of each Justice's position or on the merits of any of the particular arguments. That vote probably was was 6-3 with Roberts joining the majority. He then would be the one to assign the opinion to Alito
An example of how this works can be seen in June Medical Service v. Russo, a 2019 case in which the Court struck down, by a 5-4 vote, a Louisiana abortion law. The "opinion of the court" was written by Breyer, but only had four votes. The fifth vote for striking down the law came from Roberts, who didn't sign onto Breyer's opinion but instead wrote a concurring opinion concurring in the result but based on different reasoning. He was in the "majority" and thus he would have been the one to assign the opinion writing.
On edit: it's possible that he voted to strike down the law, in which case Thomas would've assigned the opinion. We won't really know until the opinions (and there will be more than one, that one can be certain of) are issued.
LetMyPeopleVote
(144,005 posts)This opinion will hurt the reputation of the court a great deal. I suspect that Roberts will be dissenting but time will tell
Response to onenote (Reply #11)
sl8 This message was self-deleted by its author.
LetMyPeopleVote
(144,005 posts)Oral arguments were on December 1 and the case was assigned sometime shortly after the conference by the justices