Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Simple math suggests complex back story at Supreme Court
Hat tip, SCOTUSblog. A commenter posted the link this morning in the live blog.
Here's that Sherman story about Gorsuch, for those interested:
www.wral.com
by Scott 9:42 AM Replies1?10
www.wral.com
by Scott 9:42 AM Replies1?10
Simple math suggests complex back story at Supreme Court
Posted June 16, 2020 3:37 p.m. EDT
Updated June 16, 2020 3:38 p.m. EDT
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press
WASHINGTON Supreme Court watchers were left scratching their heads when they learned Justice Neil Gorsuch was the author of Mondays landmark LGBT rights ruling, but not because the appointee of President Donald Trump might have been expected to side with his conservative colleagues in dissent.
Rather, it was a matter of math.
Each of the nine Supreme Court justices usually writes at least one opinion for each month the court hears arguments. Gorsuchs opinion was his second for October while three of his colleagues wrote nothing. That highly unusual lineup suggests something going on behind the scenes.
Gorsuch became the only justice other than retired Justice Anthony Kennedy to author a major high court ruling in favor of LGBT rights when he wrote the decision declaring workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity illegal under federal civil rights law. The 52-year-old justice earlier wrote the ruling requiring unanimous jury verdicts in state criminal cases.
The answer is obvious in one sense. He wrote opinions in both cases that attracted a majority of the court. But how he came to write them is a mystery.
{snip}
Posted June 16, 2020 3:37 p.m. EDT
Updated June 16, 2020 3:38 p.m. EDT
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press
WASHINGTON Supreme Court watchers were left scratching their heads when they learned Justice Neil Gorsuch was the author of Mondays landmark LGBT rights ruling, but not because the appointee of President Donald Trump might have been expected to side with his conservative colleagues in dissent.
Rather, it was a matter of math.
Each of the nine Supreme Court justices usually writes at least one opinion for each month the court hears arguments. Gorsuchs opinion was his second for October while three of his colleagues wrote nothing. That highly unusual lineup suggests something going on behind the scenes.
Gorsuch became the only justice other than retired Justice Anthony Kennedy to author a major high court ruling in favor of LGBT rights when he wrote the decision declaring workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity illegal under federal civil rights law. The 52-year-old justice earlier wrote the ruling requiring unanimous jury verdicts in state criminal cases.
The answer is obvious in one sense. He wrote opinions in both cases that attracted a majority of the court. But how he came to write them is a mystery.
{snip}
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1155 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Simple math suggests complex back story at Supreme Court (Original Post)
mahatmakanejeeves
Jun 2020
OP
"with a new DOJ sitting in the Wings ...and a probable Court Expansion, he is in survival mode"
lagomorph777
Jun 2020
#2
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)1. The Leadership of the Court
is apolitical and he wants to survive this dying Trump Imperial Administration. Knowing with a new DOJ sitting in the Wings five months down the road,and a probable Court Expansion,he is in survival mode.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)2. "with a new DOJ sitting in the Wings ...and a probable Court Expansion, he is in survival mode"
Exactly. Their power is about to be diluted; they are hoping to stave off the inevitable.
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)3. Just my take
from listening to the commentary from Legal folks who spent their lifetimes serving our Nation in a honest way. The next AG will not come from Burly Covey Legal.
Midnight Writer
(21,795 posts)4. I believe the Court is trotting out it's rational decisions first.
Putting their best foot forward, so to speak.
They haven't yet revealed the abomination living in the cellar.