Yes, It's Still a Conservative Supreme Court
The Supreme Courts October 2020 term wraps up this week, and it wasnt as bad as some liberals may have had reason to fear. This has led some observers to question if the court is as conservative as previously assumed. Conservative and liberal are hazy, elastic terms in everyday politics, so some allowances can be made. These terms are even less useful in the context of the Supreme Court, where the justices judicial philosophies dont always reflect Americas partisan divides. But by any defensible standard, the Supreme Courts conservative majority is secure, if not fully operational.
According to preliminary statistics by SCOTUSblog, all six of the courts conservative justices were part of majority rulings more often than their liberal colleagues. Leading the pack was Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who found himself in 97 percent of the courts majorities this term. On the liberal side, Justices Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer each found themselves in the majority 80 percent of the time, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor trailed at 72 percent. (All statistics in this article exclude Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee and Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, which havent yet been released.)
Though some of the rulings had unpredictable coalitions, there is still evidence of a strong ideological split among the justices. Justice Amy Coney Barrett voted with her conservative colleagues between 94 percent (Kavanaugh) and 84 percent (Justice Samuel Alito) of the time. By comparison, she voted with Elena Kagan 76 percent of the time, with Stephen Breyer 71 percent of the time, and with Sonia Sotomayor just 65 percent of the time. Barrett and Kavanaugh were the closest pair of justices on the court this term, followed closely by Chief Justice John Roberts and Kavanaugh at 93 percent.
In recent weeks, these shifting coalitions have given rise to the notion that the 63 split is really a 333 split, with Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett at the courts center and the courts liberals and conservatives revolving around them. Its an elegant modeland a flawed one. For one, a justices first year is an imperfect indicator of their long-term voting patterns. Its exceedingly unlikely that Barrett will end up like Justice David Souter, who drifted away from the conservatives to become a reliable member of the courts liberal wing. But as she becomes more familiar with the courts dynamics, and as Supreme Court litigants become more familiar with how she approaches cases, some drift could happen in either direction.
-more-
https://newrepublic.com/article/162878/barrett-roberts-moderate-supreme-court-term
Thunderbeast
(3,406 posts)Visualize a 7-2 Liberal Court.
Political "purists" f#@ked us for a generation.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)How will we solve problems of the present and future, by living in the past? It's a surefire way to ruin our mental health, and accomplishes exactly zero.
Thunderbeast
(3,406 posts)is how we avoid making the same mistake again and again!
I am not hand-wringing. I am challenging progressive purists to understand the real world and exercise their political power in more than a symbolic way. To change things, we must WIN elections. Gore and Clinton were not my choice in the primary. They were, however, far more likely to move the country toward my ideal than their opponents.
How did your "mental health" fare under the past two Republican presidents?
sabbat hunter
(6,829 posts)writing a majority opinion case soon that will overturn Roe v wade. Write that down.
Harker
(14,015 posts)She's the big payoff.
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,152 posts)Thunderbeast
(3,406 posts)Visualize a 7-2 Liberal Court.
Political "purists" f#@ked us for a generation.