A short but cogent analysis of the unexpectedly not-terrible SCOTUS emerging at the tail end of this term. Josh Marshall is a smart observer of government, and he makes an interesting argument that I think has some real value.

  • raccoona_nongrata@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    The extent of their “good” behavior has merely been that they voted the status quo in a few cases, and the bad is that they stepped us backwards on others.

    I think this is a common tactic for conservatives both in the courts and in the legislature; the only options they offer are either exhaust their opposition to the point that “things stay the same” feels like a fair compromise, or regress. A recent example would be the debt ceiling negotiations; democrats got nothing while making austerity concessions. But it was painted as if not arbitrarily plunging the world into economic armaggedon was some great win. In reality that shouldn’t be a thing that’s on the table to begin with.

    My faith in the SC is still very, very low. The main reason the SC didn’t side with independent state legislature theory is simply that they saw it as a threat to their own power as SC. As we see with Dobbs and now affirmative action, if it doesn’t effect them they have no problem undermining it.

  • MrGoodBright@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    TLDR: No, but they may have the sense to not push through the wackiest of the right-wing endeavors.

  • Banzai51@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, the conservatives ruling the SCOTUS are not awesome. They know that two of their rank were caught red handed in corruption. So they’re rejecting the small, easy right wing nonsense to appear reasonable, while taking a chunk out of America with the Affirmative Action ruling.

  • vinniep@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    First, we should note that the term isn’t over. Major decisions on affirmative action and student debt, among others, are still to come. So it’s premature to evaluate the term before it’s complete.

    Yeah, you can say that again

    • Can-Utility@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t imagine you actually read the article? Otherwise you wouldn’t be arguing against a position that neither the article nor I take.

      • rustyspoon@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You’re right I didn’t, and maybe I should have, but I would argue that it’s also just unhealthy for an article to have a title that’s completely antithetical to what it’s actually saying.