Clinton Suprme Ct. appointee Stephen Breyer today helped the Court's four conservatives. . .

[markpkessinger]

. . . to shred what was left of the 4th Amendment. And nobody is taking any notice. Appalling.

[elleng]

1. I haven't read his separate expression (if there is one,)

but I surely noticed. I'm curious. Breyer's been one of my favorites.

[guillaumeb]

2. Agreed. So when liberals talk about Democratic Presidential

appointees to the SCOTUS, remember this.

[markpkessinger]

4. +1 n/t

[elleng]

5. One never knows,

that's what's to remember. Recall Earl Warren?

[guillaumeb]

19. An excellent point. And Kennedy can also surprise people. eom

[TwilightZone]

6. Because of one vote by one justice?

Sure, why not.

[BootinUp]

7. They forgot he also appointed Ginsburg. nt

[markpkessinger]

10. One extremely important and significant vote, yes. n/t

[obamanut2012]

11. Yup, because Trumo would appoint a liberal Justice

[BootinUp]

3. Breyer has never impressed me a whole lot. Truth is

that Justices don't always turn out as expected. Also, that the decision itself is probably not going to be all that unpopular. I hate it, just saying that many Americans might see this differently than I.

[floriduck]

8. Sandra Day O'Connor was a Reagan nominee too.

[markpkessinger]

9. Right . . .

. . . and she voted to appoint George W. Bush. 'nuff said!

[rhett o rick]

14. And she voted to give Bush the presidency.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

12. It sounds like a bad call

to suggest- as I presume you are- that all of Hillary's SCOTUS picks will therefore be awful right-wingers seems a bit of a stretch (never minding the fact that she herself didn't pick him).

[markpkessinger]

13. The destruction of the 4th Amendment is a "bad call" . . .

Wow!

[Gabi Hayes]

15. simply mind boggling. breyer's actions are inexcusable and grounds for....what?

at a loss for words.

now. if you want to get REALLY REALLY pissed, watch this. SCOTUS, according to the clip, is ready to rule on this momentarily

[LanternWaste]

23. "Destruction" seems both self-serving and melodramatic

"Destruction" seems both self-serving and melodramatic if we look at the meaning of the word and compare it to the decision.

Bias is a bad-call. Objectivity is not.

[DonRedwood]

31. Everything is her fault, remember?

Remember back when she started slavery, wrote Jim Crow laws, lost the Vietnam war and had the adacity to name her dog Checkers? Yup. All Hillary... It's true. I read it in conservative cave, just like where it seems much of DU content comes from these days.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

32. Just like with Obama

Hillary will be held responsible for bad SCOTUS rulings (made by a person appointed by her husband literally two decades ago) and for fixing all of society's ills NOW NOW NOW.

[pnwmom]

16. And Ruth Ginsburg, his other appointee, dissented.

[BlueCaliDem]

29. Exactly. One vote doesn't define the justice. Breyer has been extremely liberal in his past

votes on equally important cases.

[elljay]

17. A suggestion from a lawyer

I haven't read the opinion so cannot and will not comment on it. And that is precisely my point- you cannot look at a ruling and infer exactly why a Justice ruled as s/he did without reading the full opinion, especially that justice's separate concurrence or dissent if there was one. Sometimes the outcome is bad because of a technical issue (e.g. standing) and not because the justice agrees with the majority's reasoning or the outcome. Again, not having read it I can't say for sure, but I would suggest reading it before throwing Breyer under the bus. Then, if he really did screw it up, feel free to throw away.

[Gabi Hayes]

18. right....who's that knocking at your door?

is it the cop in the woodpile?

go ahead, ask him:

seen this? Breyer is a consistent fourth amendment antagonist; worse, even than Scalia:

Justice Breyer is by many measures more conservative than the court’s three other liberals. He was more likely to vote with Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kennedy, Justice Thomas or Justice Alito than any of the other liberals. But there was one stark and telling exception: Justice Breyer was less likely than any of the other liberals to vote with Justice Scalia.

Those two justices often tangle at oral arguments and often have differing views of privacy rights, with Justice Scalia joining the court’s liberals in Fourth Amendment cases and Justice Breyer voting the other way.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/06/24/upshot/24up-scotus-agreement-rates.html?_r=0

lastly, as Trump has said, I'm sure, technical, legalistic details are for losers! The outcome is the only thing that counts. see you in court

[elleng]

22. Thanks, elljay,

and DITTO, from another lawyer.



No second expression from Mr. Justice Breyer that I've found.

[elljay]

25. I just hate it when people jump to conclusions!

Especially based on news reports.

[elleng]

26. So do I but it's SO common,

and there's such a lack of understanding of the legal process; THAT really pisses me off!

[elljay]

30. Watching legal shows on tv

is what has done it, plus inadequate education in civics in our schools. They think everything is like Law and Order or LA Law.

[Blasphemer]

20. While I may disagree...

and Breyer has "gone rogue" in other decisions, I don't think having a different legal interpretation on one, or a few cases, makes one a bad justice. When the right-wing justices veer left, they are heralded for it. It could simply come down to the law, and their interpretation of it, more than politics and that's their job. That said, this decision does not make me enthusiastic about Garland sitting on the SCOTUS. I suspect he would have voted like Breyer. I'd prefer a more liberal voice on L&O issues, and I do think Clinton would nominate someone more to the left on those issues.

[zipplewrath]

21. Kinda hard under the new rules.

You can note it, but you can't suggest that any candidate or someone with a D after their name is some how responsible or otherwise untrustworthy to make these kinds of appointments. Truth is, I'm not sure that Breyer won't be considered someone with a "D" after their name. So it really limits comment to "aw shucks".

[LanternWaste]

24. Objective and valid criticism is yet allowed

Objective and valid criticism/analysis is yet allowed. If however our biases or a lack of relevant information force us to rely on melodramatic pronunciations, innuendo and unsupported allegations, that seems a problem with the person rather than the system.

[zipplewrath]

27. Of the decision

But not of the deciders.

[WhiteTara]

28. This is probably Hillary's fault too

[lancer78]

33. Everyone is fixated

by their Congressperson's pandering today.