The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

[volfanhill]

It was an entirely partisan display by the household of the guy who might have had to rule on who was president.

Downplay it if you want, but it's a bad look for the idea that the court is above politics.

Upside down flag is not the symbol for insurrection or over throw the government
I did a cursory image search from 1/6 and found 1 upside down flag out of hundreds of flags . So its clearly not a “symbol” for 1/6.

Its not downplaying anything. People are taking an upside down flag and giving it meaning that isn't backed up by anything 1/6 related. Its faux outrage.

 

[LouderVol]

It was an entirely partisan display by the household of the guy who might have had to rule on who was president.

Downplay it if you want, but it's a bad look for the idea that the court is above politics.

I don't think there is a politician, judge, officer, bureaucrat who hasn't had a spouse or immediate family member do something, on their own property, that is directly in conflict with the intended role/requirements of the elected/appointed.

if it wasn't this flag LG would have just found the next thing to make it so that ANY ruling by the SC or a single member that is ever so slightly not in the worst light for Trump was unacceptable. I mean it speaks volumes that he had to dig up something from 4 years ago by the guys wife. and at the same time he had the power to cause the very issue LG is afraid of, but didn't. but now suddenly 4 years later, its going to be different?

 

[lawgator1]

Upside down flag is not the symbol for insurrection or over throw the government
I did a cursory image search from 1/6 and found 1 upside down flag out of hundreds of flags . So its clearly not a “symbol” for 1/6.

Its not downplaying anything. People are taking an upside down flag and giving it meaning that isn't backed up by anything 1/6 related. Its faux outrage.

Well, that's even worse. That means there is absolutely no justification for her to have flown it upside down.

 

[volfanhill]

Well, that's even worse. That means there is absolutely no justification for her to have flown it upside down.

She had whatever reason she had. The family has already comenout with an explanation. Or we could use your made up reason. I'll stick with my post regarding the meaning of an upside down flag, how its never been equated to being a symbol for 1/6 until today, and the statement from Alito

 

[lawgator1]

She had whatever reason she had. The family has already comenout with an explanation. Or we could use your made up reason. I'll stick with my post regarding the meaning of an upside down flag, how its never been equated to being a symbol for 1/6 until today, and the statement from Alito

It's been around in other contexts, including even the left upset by Roe being overturned.

But in this context, given the timing, I'm not buying the innocent explanation of countering a fricking yard sign. I think you have to be really gullible to buy that explanation.

 

[volfanhill]

It's been around in other contexts, including even the left upset by Roe being overturned.

But in this context, given the timing, I'm not buying the innocent explanation of countering a fricking yard sign. I think you have to be really gullible to buy that explanation.

Was that flag desecration too? How consistent are you?

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

Just a reminder that the entire liberal bloc of the SC is as much or even more to the fringes than Alito....

 

[lawgator1]

Was that flag desecration too? How consistent are you?

It has been pointed out to me here that neither is "desecration." But I think both are disrespectful.

Both instances involve using that symbol in hyperbole over a singular political issue, exaggerating the significance of it by invoking the idea of do or die national crisis, when neither was remotely close to that.

 

[RockyTop85]

Just a reminder that the entire liberal bloc of the SC is as much or even more to the fringes than Alito....

Sotomayor, yes. Not sure about Jackson. Kagan is not.

Also have to account for the Trump ballot case where the originalists suddenly found considering consequences more important than the text of the constitution after espousing text history and tradition above all in Bruen and Dobbs (and in about 100 dissents/concurrences for Thomas).

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

Sotomayor, yes. Not sure about Jackson. Kagan is not.

Also have to account for the Trump ballot case where the originalists suddenly found considering consequences more important than the text of the constitution after espousing text history and tradition above all in Bruen and Dobbs (and in about 100 dissents/concurrences for Thomas).

Kagan is right there with Thomas and Alito with how far they are out on the fringes.

Sotomayor is in her own universe....

 

[RockyTop85]

Kagan is right there with Thomas and Alito with how far they are out on the fringes.

Sotomayor is in her own universe....

I disagree and think theres probably some evidence that it is objectively incorrect. IMO, You’re underselling Alito and vastly overselling Kagan.

Thomas regularly writes solo dissents saying how he’d overturn longstanding precedent like New York Times v. Sullivan. That’s pretty fringe. Alito went all in on the nonexistent platform/publisher dichotomy in Section 230 a few years ago, which was pure right wing fantasy.

Sotomayor was in the majority more than any other Justice last term. I still think she’s equivalent to Alito in terms of partisanship but it’s hard to accomplish that if she’s the most fringe.

Kagan is essentially a mirror image of the center right trio.

 

[JOEY’S ALL VOL !!!]

Nice dodge. Answer the point. You can't have Supreme Court Justices making overtly political statements like this. If the Dems get control of the House and Senate they ought to impeach him. Throw him off the bench.

Does the weight of your hypocrisy ever give you pause?

 

[85SugarVol]

Just a reminder that the entire liberal bloc of the SC is as much or even more to the fringes than Alito....

Sotomayor out-extremes him, without question. Don’t think the other two do though.

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

Sotomayor out-extremes him, without question. Don’t think the other two do though.

If you look at Martin Quinn score

Sotomayor is just an incredible outlier.

Kagan is slightly closer to the center than Alito or Thomas so I stand corrected. She is still closer to them than she is to Gorsuch/ACB/Kavanaugh...

 

[85SugarVol]

Just a reminder that the entire liberal bloc of the SC is as much or even more to the fringes than Alito....

Sotomayor, yes. Not sure about Jackson. Kagan is not.

Also have to account for the Trump ballot case where the originalists suddenly found considering consequences more important than the text of the constitution after espousing text history and tradition above all in Bruen and Dobbs (and in about 100 dissents/concurrences for Thomas).

Sotomayor out-extremes him, without question. Don’t think the other two do though.

Take these for what they’re worth. There are multiple versions of these - analyses attempting to quantify, and then graphically represent ideological leaning of the Justices.

This one is from Axios couple of years back -

 

[85SugarVol]

If you look at Martin Quinn score

Sotomayor is just an incredible outlier.

Kagan is slightly closer to the center than Alito or Thomas so I stand corrected. She is still closer to them than she is to Gorsuch/ACB/Kavanaugh...

For sure. And I just posted Martin-Quinn from ‘22-‘23

 

[85SugarVol]

An older version from 538

 

[lawgator1]

I view Thomas and Alito as basically interchangeable. Robert's is the main moderate.

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

Anything more than +1 or -1 shows clear ideological bias. +2 or -2 which is where Alito, Thomas, Kagan, KBJ reside is hackery...

-4 like Sotomayor is historically on the fringes for the Court...

 

[85SugarVol]

I view Thomas and Alito as basically interchangeable. Robert's is the main moderate.

No he’s not. Rad Kav is just as centerline as Roberts. More so even, depending on the analysis.

 

[85SugarVol]

Anything more than +1 or -1 shows clear ideological bias. +2 or -2 which is where Alito, Thomas, Kagan, KBJ reside is hackery...

-4 like Sotomayor is historically on the fringes for the Court...

I’ve seen some other projections that have Sotomayor neck and neck with Ginsburg for the People’s Fringe Champion.

 

[RockyTop85]

An older version from 538

View attachment 641403

I had a long response to these typed up that talked about Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, but somehow it disappeared. I guess this still got kind of long but it skimps on some explanation.

Essentially, without knowing their methodology, I don’t really agree with where these things place the center, I think it’s probably skewed slightly right by the 6-3 court and by compressing everything into just a left/right axis.

Left/right axis:
If you look at religious liberty cases and some other types of cases, Roberts and Kavanaugh are conservative, not centrist. But they don’t always side with the Gorsuch/Thomas/Alito wing because they are less radical and more institutionalist. Roberts in particular values incremental changes rather than sweeping overhaul.

Skewed center:
If they’re basing distance from the center on the outcome of the case, then a more conservative majority pulls the center to the right. But before it became a 6-3 court, Roberts and Kagan were in a lot of majorities together on big cases. That didn’t change because they changed their positions, IMO. It changed because the court became more conservative. So essentially theorizing that you’ve got more politically charged cases coming in and the liberal judges look more liberal because they can’t form a coalition on those cases.

 

[Sea Ray]

It looks like the Democrats are better at nominating staunch leftists than the Republicans do staunch right wingers. Honestly, this has always been the case going back to O'Connor, Kennedy and Souter. Why Republicans dominate moderates while the Dems are putting far leftists on the court has always mystified me...I won't even get into GW Bush trying to put Harriet Myers on the court. The right wing of the party justly put a stop to that

 

[85SugarVol]

I had a long response to these typed up that talked about Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, but somehow it disappeared. I guess this still got kind of long but it skimps on some explanation.

Essentially, without knowing their methodology, I don’t really agree with where these things place the center, I think it’s probably skewed slightly right by the 6-3 court and by compressing everything into just a left/right axis.

Left/right axis:
If you look at religious liberty cases and some other types of cases, Roberts and Kavanaugh are conservative, not centrist. But they don’t always side with the Gorsuch/Thomas/Alito wing because they are less radical and more institutionalist. Roberts in particular values incremental changes rather than sweeping overhaul.

Skewed center:
If they’re basing distance from the center on the outcome of the case, then a more conservative majority pulls the center to the right. But before it became a 6-3 court, Roberts and Kagan were in a lot of majorities together on big cases. That didn’t change because they changed their positions, IMO. It changed because the court became more conservative. So essentially theorizing that you’ve got more politically charged cases coming in and the liberal judges look more liberal because they can’t form a coalition on those cases.

I think I get where you’re coming from.

The methodology is complicated. It sounds like it is a complex Monte Carlo simulation. I understand fundamentally what a Monte Carlo simulation does, but the more advanced application of it in the Martin-Quinn is a bit beyond my grade.

But methodology aside, do you agree with the outcomes? Are you buying that the Burger Court presents as one of the most Conservative? Are you buying that the Warren Court presents as one of the most Liberal?

And the “center line” does not change based on the Court’s composition - the “median Justice” does.



Were Marshall, Stevens, & Ginsburg some of the most Liberal Justices to sit the Court?
Were Rehnquist, Scalia, & Thomas some of the most Conservative to sit the Court?

 

[85SugarVol]

I think I get where you’re coming from.

The methodology is complicated. It sounds like it is a complex Monte Carlo simulation. I understand fundamentally what a Monte Carlo simulation does, but the more advanced application of it in the Martin-Quinn is a bit beyond my grade.

But methodology aside, do you agree with the outcomes? Are you buying that the Burger Court presents as one of the most Conservative? Are you buying that the Warren Court presents as one of the most Liberal?

And the “center line” does not change based on the Court’s composition - the “median Justice” does.

View attachment 641475

Were Marshall, Stevens, & Ginsburg some of the most Liberal Justices to sit the Court?
Were Rehnquist, Scalia, & Thomas some of the most Conservative to sit the Court?

@BigOrangeMojo

I don’t know who that Douglas was from 1955-1975, but check that score - dude liked to party lol.