Has the Supreme Court become "radicalized" ?

[kentuck]

Are the majority now part of the cult?

Although the decision about Trump's "executive privilege" should be cut and dried, is this Court far-enough removed from politics to make a rational decision?

I have my doubts.

The power of the "cult" is over-whelming in the Republican Party and the Court has already shown that they are ready to play Republican politics if it is the right issue.

Perhaps it is a thought we should not entertain? They are not insane. Surely they will not open a can of worms that will smell all the way to Moscow?

[gab13by13]

1. American oligarchs fund

radical organizations like the Federalist Society and they choose the SC justices. (Republican chosen justices)

If I were forced to bet I am betting that the SC will not take up the executive privilege case. I am willing to bet 1 dollar to the charity of choice. I still believe that Chief Justice Roberts can twist a couple of arms to not take the case. Roberts is a person who is concerned about his legacy and if the court delays long enough or sides with Trump, Robert's court will have been a doorway that led us into autocracy.

[kentuck]

2. In my opinion...

Last edited Mon Dec 13, 2021, 10:28 AM - Edit history (1)

Alito may be the strongest "cultist", with Thomas a close second. Kavanaugh would probably go along with them. Amy Coney Barrett could go either way, in my view. Gorsuch and Roberts lean more to the protection of our Constitution, in my opinion.

[jimfields33]

4. Interesting that only the female gets a disparaging name.

[kentuck]

5. Fixed.

Thanks.

[jimfields33]

9. Thanks! Your wonderful!

Have a great day!

[lark]

3. I don't know how you can conclude that, given their approval of the Texas scheme.

If they were regular legal folks, they would have enjoined Texas from implementing this extreme scheme, but they let it stand. That tells you all you need to know about their intentions. They are firebombers and are out to destroy us, while pretending to be reasonable and rational but going full on Confederalist on us. They want a fascist right wing nation, but want to pretend they aren't rabid corporatists/confederalists/white nationalists when they are, 100% for the felonious six. I call them that because of their wanted constitutional destruction in favor or religion and big business and against the working class/poor.

[gab13by13]

6. I agree 100% with your post,

I may be wrong that Roberts can sway these partisan justices and the Texas abortion fiasco decision cuts deeply into my argument. Robert's court took a big hit for the court not staying the Texas law so I guess my argument is does Roberts care if his court takes another hit in ruling in favor of Trump's executive immunity? Maybe I am wrong about Roberts, maybe he is no different than Clarence Thomas.

[lark]

7. I think Roberts has almost zero control over the firebombers.

Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavarape and Handmaiden have made their entire lives about owning the libs and pushing right wing, religious, misogynistic and corporatist schemes and ignoring all laws they don't like. They don't give a shit about Roberts or the law, they just have a point of view that they are pushing and that's what they care about. They also don't like being called out, because they know they are in he process of destroying us and trying to pretend everythings' normal - but it is not and getting worse - by their designs.

[melm00se]

8. Let's look at some statistics

from the 2020 sitting.

43 of 67 cases were decided in what can be best described in a non-partisan matter



Here are the justices and the frequency of appearing in the majority



Here is the distribution of advocates by sex (I honestly would have thought that the distribution would have been more equal).



here is the way to become a Supreme Court Advocate

[dpibel]

10. Link to your source?

Hard to tell just what this means without knowing how they sorted partisan from nonpartisan.

Regardless, it's not going to tell you much. In any given session of the Supremes, there's only a handful of hot-button cases.

I'm not sure how you'd even try to assign a partisanship score to, for instance, a contracts case, or a patent dispute, or a statutory construction decision.

So the real question is not the overall count. It's how the court goes on the big civil rights and other cases that determine how most of us live.

[melm00se]

11. scotusblog.com/statistics

[dpibel]

12. Thanks

I was misreading the pie chart.

I see now that you are using vote split as a proxy for partisanship.

Again, I don't think that works, because there are so many cases that have no identifiably partisan aspect.

You can't really tell much about the effectiveness of McConnell's court packing without having a breakdown of the subject matter of the cases.

[myohmy2]

13. political hacks...

...each and every one...

...support the "cult"?

...man, they are the "cult"...

...