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.
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.
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.