General Discussion

MorbidButterflyTat

(4,124 posts)

60. Liberal SC Justices' written dissenting opinions

Mon Jun 24, 2024, 02:39 PM

Jun 2024

are meaningless and do nothing, but, "They should be out in public... 'it's not us, it's them."" will have meaning and do what, exactly, besides fuel right wing BS?

And calling them cowards who need to put on their "big girl panties," is beyond ugly.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

ITAL

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why are Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson not calling out the other justices for delay? [View all] Goodheart Jun 2024 OP

Do you think it would make the other justices behave if they did that? Ocelot II Jun 2024 #1

Of course it wouldn't. Goodheart Jun 2024 #2

They know. JohnSJ Jun 2024 #3

Maybe through experience, they know the schedule jimfields33 Jun 2024 #4

Very generous of you NoRethugFriends Jun 2024 #7

It's not hard when they've been doing this for decades. jimfields33 Jun 2024 #19

good grief. they know what the rethugs on the court are doing NoRethugFriends Jun 2024 #21

I think they see their roll as writing reasoned dissents when they disagree. I would not be surprised if one of them Silent Type Jun 2024 #5

Why are you making excuses for them? triron Jun 2024 #46

Because we depend on the 3 liberal justices. You can bash them if you like. Silent Type Jun 2024 #47

You can't shame the shameless. RockRaven Jun 2024 #6

I am just as anxious as anyone anciano Jun 2024 #8

Prolly a serious violation of protocol; elleng Jun 2024 #9

Absolutely. H2O Man Jun 2024 #22

Yes indeed. elleng Jun 2024 #25

Perhaps the court needs to be destroyed. triron Jun 2024 #48

Respectfully disagree. H2O Man Jun 2024 #52

Amen to this! ShazzieB Jun 2024 #57

Agree. MorbidButterflyTat Jun 2024 #58

Very well said! H2O Man Jun 2024 #59

Protocol? As I've said, when did ethics govern this Court? Goodheart Jun 2024 #33

Perhaps OUR side wishes to keep the sanctity of the court. yagotme Jun 2024 #43

Yep triron Jun 2024 #49

If there's a "protocol" is it public? Or, just like their internal ethics, is it cloaked? erronis Jun 2024 #53

Sotomayor hinted that she cried over some of the rulings coming down. I think it's kick the can. TheBlackAdder Jun 2024 #10

She needs to stop crying in private and do the right thing. Irish_Dem Jun 2024 #15

She is doing the right thing. former9thward Jun 2024 #18

The right thing is what she's doing right now n/t Polybius Jun 2024 #27

I strongly disagree. Irish_Dem Jun 2024 #29

Did you see Antonin Scalia call out RGB and others who were in the majority that he strongly disagreed with? Polybius Jun 2024 #44

Our democracy is doomed if leaders do nothing. Irish_Dem Jun 2024 #51

I'm not operating under any delusion that it could mean a trial date before November Goodheart Jun 2024 #34

I can't imagine any positive impact of such a move Raven123 Jun 2024 #11

It would let the public know the whole team is not corrupt. Irish_Dem Jun 2024 #16

They can say the same in their written opinions Raven123 Jun 2024 #31

Their written opinions are meaningless and do nothing. Irish_Dem Jun 2024 #32

No public statements from the justices will "stop the carnage." Raven123 Jun 2024 #42

Elections can be overturned by Congress and the SC. Irish_Dem Jun 2024 #50

Liberal SC Justices' written dissenting opinions MorbidButterflyTat Jun 2024 #60

I have an ugly feeling that Alito and Thomas are trying to strong arm Coney-Barrett. Baitball Blogger Jun 2024 #12

My father-in-law was just a Circuit Judge, that is Never done. MerryBlooms Jun 2024 #13

High time that it IS done. Goodheart Jun 2024 #35

Silence is complicity. Irish_Dem Jun 2024 #14

could be a matter of protocol. could be because they also aren't ready for the decision to come out. onenote Jun 2024 #17

None of which would have prevented any of them from the very beginning publicly proclaiming Goodheart Jun 2024 #36

Except, and none of us know, they may have voted to take the case. onenote Jun 2024 #40

I'd rather keep the focus on the 6 problem Joinfortmill Jun 2024 #20

Collegiality Bucky Jun 2024 #23

Is there anything to gain from, say, Jamie Raskin publicly criticizing Jim Jordan? Goodheart Jun 2024 #37

Raskin can fundraise and get votes in the upcoming election NT AZSkiffyGeek Jun 2024 #55

Of course Bucky Jun 2024 #61

Yes, of course. That's my point. There's also much to gain Goodheart Jun 2024 #62

The liberal justices aren't here to meet anyone's vicarious emotional needs. Nt Fiendish Thingy Jun 2024 #24

Because that's not how the Supreme Court does things? Polybius Jun 2024 #26

+1... myohmy2 Jun 2024 #28

I been thinking the same damn thing. Emile Jun 2024 #30

Apparently the answers are "protocol" and "collegiality".... Goodheart Jun 2024 #38

Maybe they don't think there's an unnecessary delay? Kaleva Jun 2024 #39

pretty useless DoBW Jun 2024 #41

I don't think that they would do that publicly Mad_Machine76 Jun 2024 #45

It's an elite club, and we're not in it. budkin Jun 2024 #54

Perhaps they don't feel there is a delay DetroitLegalBeagle Jun 2024 #56