General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSupreme Court dissents are generally worth as much as the paper they're written on, but
Link to tweet
@jaywillis
Supreme Court dissents are generally worth as much as the paper they're written on, but I am glad that in Dobbs the liberals skipped the Rule of Law boilerplate and just talked about the Court as the glorified numbers game that it is https://ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/dobbs-s
flying rabbit
(4,612 posts)BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Of personal interest over professional responsibility.
ShazzieB
(15,958 posts)I believe Barrett was the secret ingredient. I don't think Roberts was quite as fully on board as the others, and there was at least a small chance that he might vote with the four liberals that were on the court at the time.
Once Barrett joined the court, all they had to do was wait for the right case to come along, and when it did, they pounced.
When Alito wrote the opinion, he did a sloppy job, because those 5 had their minds made up JN ADVANCE, and writing the justification was just a formality.
Shame on Roberts for going along with them, even though he didn't really agree with overturning Roe.
In It to Win It
(8,143 posts)Abortion as a constitutional right was never a winning side for them. Their minds were already made up. There were no amount of arguments, facts, briefs or anything else that would have convinced them otherwise. There was no chance of winning.
Why did these 5 justices even bothered asking questions and asking for briefs because their minds were already made up. Why waste everyone's time? Because they had to make it look like we had a fighting chance, even though we knew what the outcome was going to be.
Robert's partial concurrence suggested to me that he wasn't ready for the court to answer whether abortion is a constitutional right. It seems he wanted to save that question for another day.