General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJustice Breyer: SCOTUS allowing Texas to mostly ban abortions 'very bad' but not political
Link to tweet
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/scotus-allowing-texas-ban-abortions-bad-political-justice/story
Justice Stephen Breyer said Tuesday the Supreme Courts recent 5-4 decision allowing Texas to effectively ban abortion across the state was very bad but not politically motivated.
We dont trade votes, and members of the court have different judicial philosophies, Breyer, the courts most senior liberal justice, told George Stephanopoulos on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"Some emphasize more text. ... Some, like me, probably emphasize more purposes. And the great divisions are probably much more along those lines than what we would think of as political lines," Breyer said.
"I thought that was a very bad decision and I dissented, he said.
The courts denial of the request from Texas abortion providers to temporarily put state law SB8 on hold also drew sharp criticism from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who wrote in dissent that the court chose to "ignore its constitutional obligations the sanctity of its precedents and of the rule of law."
*snip*
blm
(113,037 posts)sunonmars
(8,656 posts)entwined with the GOP.
I just get a horrible feeling this guy is going to cost us another SC seat by not doing the right thing and going to let Biden a replacement on.
Nevilledog
(51,056 posts)StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)With the possible exception of Kavanaugh, whom I don't believe has any religious, philosophical, or moral core, are reflecting their deeply-held beliefs and philosophies.
I don't think they voted the way they did to advance any political agenda or party. They voted the way they did to advance their deeply held religious and philosophical views - which is actually worse, in my opinion. And it's one of the reasons that I believe it's not only perfectly appropriate but absolutely imperative, to probe nominees' personal views when considering whether they should be confirmed to lifetime appointments to the federal bench. These conservative justices embody the practice of injecting of their personal beliefs into judicial decision-making. They aren't calling balls or strikes but are issuing outcome determinative decisions because they truly believe that the results are correct.
But while I agree with him, I wish he hadn't said it.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)He's bound to be misunderstood and the comment isn't helpful.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Either embarassingly naive or deliberately ignoring reality.
UTUSN
(70,671 posts)what exactly is it that makes his staying on the bench so necessary and irreplaceable (by another Lib)?
Mad_Machine76
(24,401 posts)Plus hes now the Senior liberal justice. But he saw what happened over the last 4 years like the rest of us so I cant believe he doesnt recognize the stakes here
Baitball Blogger
(46,697 posts)His era of fair play is long gone. We need someone in their that can stand up and call out the political bullshit where they see it.
Voltaire2
(12,991 posts)LiberalFighter
(50,826 posts)in2herbs
(2,944 posts)Americans have earned?
How can he conclude that it was merely a very bad decision when the decision rendered was absent a plethora of lower court arguments? That in itself makes it a very bad decision.
I concur. He needs to go. His clock has run out.
NQAS
(10,749 posts)So it's just a coincidence that the vote was along party lines, except for the 4th vote on the dissenting side.
And Coney Island said that she was surprised that people thought the court was political. What world are these people living in?
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)All his excusifying to the contrary (Is anyone saying that the Justices are trading votes? No), the Justices who voted not to block the Texas law from being enacted are all dedicated to curtailing human rights and full access to health care. I'm not exaggerating, unless you think that women's rights are not human rights.