Justices Hint at Strains as Supreme Court Comes Under Scrutiny

christiefan915 said:
Funny, I always thought Thomas was the most partisan and political.
Click to expand...
He's second place now. Even Jackson's collogues have given her the smackdown for being hyper partisan. Come on, when even Sotomayor is bitch slapping her for her stupid as a Leftist, you have some serious problems.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
He's second place now. Even Jackson's collogues have given her the smackdown for being hyper partisan. Come on, when even Sotomayor is bitch slapping her for her stupid as a Leftist, you have some serious problems.
Click to expand...
Too bad nobody bitch-slapped Thomas over the years. He's a crook and a grifter besides being hyper partisan.
 
christiefan915 said:
Too bad nobody bitch-slapped Thomas over the years. He's a crook and a grifter besides being hyper partisan.
Click to expand...
Thomas may, is, be highly partisan, but he's not stupid. Brown is just plain flat stupid. Her regular dissents to decisions, particularly 8 to 1 ones, get derision from the other Justices. Hell, she's been verbally smacked down while the court is in session several times now, a true rarity.

Thomas may be disagreed with, but at least he's not just spouting crazy shit with no basis in law, written or case, like Brown does. She seems to think that her personal opinion, emotional feelings, and politics are sufficient reasons to base a legal decision on. Thomas at least uses the law and case law, even if he takes things in a strange, partisan, direction sometimes.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Thomas may, is, be highly partisan, but he's not stupid. Brown is just plain flat stupid. Her regular dissents to decisions, particularly 8 to 1 ones, get derision from the other Justices. Hell, she's been verbally smacked down while the court is in session several times now, a true rarity.

Thomas may be disagreed with, but at least he's not just spouting crazy shit with no basis in law, written or case, like Brown does. She seems to think that her personal opinion, emotional feelings, and politics are sufficient reasons to base a legal decision on. Thomas at least uses the law and case law, even if he takes things in a strange, partisan, direction sometimes.
Click to expand...
Even if I was to agree with you, which I don’t, then Thomas is worse given he is as you say smart but the few majority opinions he has authored are sophomoric at best

And his textualism/originalism rationale is bullshit, on Trump’s immunity case he even asked directly if Presidential immunity was anywhere in the Constitution, which it is not, and then went and voted for it
 
archives said:
Even if I was to agree with you, which I don’t, then Thomas is worse given he is as you say smart but the few majority opinions he has authored are sophomoric at best

And his textualism/originalism rationale is bullshit, on Trump’s immunity case he even asked directly if Presidential immunity was anywhere in the Constitution, which it is not, and then went and voted for it
Click to expand...
He hasn't been rebuked during open session of the court, Jackson has and more than once. He also isn't regularly writing opinions that go against 7 to 2 and 8 to 1 decisions where he's the only dissenting voice, Jackson has.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
He hasn't been rebuked during open session of the court, Jackson has and more than once. He also isn't regularly writing opinions that go against 7 to 2 and 8 to 1 decisions where he's the only dissenting voice, Jackson has.
Click to expand...
Thomas has been rebuked continuously throughout his career, which is in itself amazing considering he seldom says much, he went a decade without not even asking a single question

That’s the purpose of authoring a dissenting opinion, and with a 6+3 split, why would Thomas write a dissenting opinion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top