• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

SCOTUS news and opinions

But he does rule the direction she would want. Whether it's a result of listening to her or not, she gets what she wants.
 
But that can't be quite right, can it? If she has those views (as she does), wouldn't she be thrilled that he's in a position where he can do so much to effect them?

(I didn't hear her part of the tape)
You're missing the point I think. Of course she is happy for him to be able to enact the agenda she favors... but she is annoyed that he (and by extension, she, herself) is expected to put on what she regards as the dog-and-pony-show of impartiality, solemn, respectable jurisprudence and such. She just wants to be able to display rank partisan bias and be left alone to do so, while he is similarly left alone to enact their religious agenda, unfettered and uncriticized by the media/public.
 
Alito's rulings tend to be colored by his reliance on Christianity.
Thomas' rulings are based on how many freebies he gets from his ultra wealthy benefactors.

Hard to decide which is worse, although both are terrible for the US.
 
You're missing the point I think. Of course she is happy for him to be able to enact the agenda she favors... but she is annoyed that he (and by extension, she, herself) is expected to put on what she regards as the dog-and-pony-show of impartiality, solemn, respectable jurisprudence and such. She just wants to be able to display rank partisan bias and be left alone to do so, while he is similarly left alone to enact their religious agenda, unfettered and uncriticized by the media/public.

I'll go further and identify this as an example of what conservatives believe is their right to be cool, which is basically that they believe they should have the right not only to speak, but to have other people go "wow that is the bravest and coolest thing anyone has ever said, you are awesome". They actually believe that being subject to criticism for their public actions and utterances is some kind of unconscionable violation of their personal dignity.
 
You're missing the point I think. Of course she is happy for him to be able to enact the agenda she favors... but she is annoyed that he (and by extension, she, herself) is expected to put on what she regards as the dog-and-pony-show of impartiality, solemn, respectable jurisprudence and such. She just wants to be able to display rank partisan bias and be left alone to do so, while he is similarly left alone to enact their religious agenda, unfettered and uncriticized by the media/public.
Right, but it was in connection with a quote longing for his days on the Court to be over.
 
She knows he's abusing his position, and its tiresome for him to even pretend to be impartial and unbiased, so much so, that Alito can't even be bothered to pretend anymore. Roberts at least gives the correct response, befitting a Judge, because he still actually cares and respects the office. Alito, not so much... Alito knows he is strictly a partisan agent and intends to shamelessly and openly abuse his position for exactly those ends.


I don't think Roberts respects the Court or Constitution any more than Alito. Roberts has a political agenda as well. He always has. He's just smarter about it. If Alito's aim is to create Christian Nationalism, and Thomas's aim is to recreate White Nationalism, Robert's aim has always been to recreate The Gilded Age of Capitalism. Roberts's problem is that on the one hand, he really doesn't care about the God Botherers or the racists. He cares about the oligarchs.

Robert's problem is that he wants his rewrite of the Constitution to stand the Test of Time. And the Culture Warriors endanger that. The more Alito and Thomas and the others make the The Roberts Court look fraudulent, the more it endangers the legacy that Roberts himself defecated his life to: The rolling back of a century of progressive economic legislation and jurisprudence.
 
Roberts is only too happy to do racist and dominionist stuff if it suits him though. Like the voting rights stuff really dovetails with the rolling back the new deal and progressive era stuff.
 
Roberts is only too happy to do racist and dominionist stuff if it suits him though. Like the voting rights stuff really dovetails with the rolling back the new deal and progressive era stuff.

But that's strategic, more than ideological. He needs the extremists for his agenda. He has to balance keeping them from going too far with keeping them in his corner for what he wants.
 
But that's strategic, more than ideological. He needs the extremists for his agenda.

I kind of agree, I guess? I mean I don't think Roberts is as egregiously racist or sexist as Alito is, but I don't think I would describe him as not sexist or not racist.
 
You might note that Alito doesn't actually say this despite agreeing with a wider (and fairly non-legal) point presented to him.
That's why the article caption said that he agreed with the proposition, not asserted it. The very thing you quote.
 
No that's what we call covering up an author's opinion with the veneer of "news analysis".
Or are we to assume that every point a question puts forth that's not addressed, the person answering must therefore agree with it?

Did you read the article? Agreeing is exactly what he did:

Windsor goes on to tell Alito: “People in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that — to return our country to a place of godliness.”

“I agree with you. I agree with you,” replies Alito
Twice. Which is often a way of communicating emphatic agreement.
 
Right, but it was in connection with a quote longing for his days on the Court to be over.
Another facet of her statement in that regard, is that she explicitly states, that she is deferring to Alito, on whether or not to put up the politically charged/adversarial flags. She cites a specific example of her wanting to put up such a flag and him telling her "No" and her acquiescing to his decision.. presumably because of his "[Supreme Court] nonsense". So Alito's blaming her for the Jan 6th supportive flags is contradicted, because she's claiming that she wouldn't have put the flag up if he told her not to.

One more important aspect of Alito throwing his wife under the bus is that he claimed it was because he was against putting up the flag, but was "respecting her right to choose for herself"... ironic because he wrote the opinion overturning Roe.
 
Also, on MSNBC last night, Alex Wagner interviewed the neighbor, and she recounted having conversations with the couple about the flag. Alito knew his household was flying an upside-down American flag.
 
On that... Alito claimed that he and his wife had a verbal altercation with their neighbors... and that the neighbor(s) had insulted him and his wife, causing his wife to put up the flag in retaliation... but the neighbor, when interviewed, revealed that the argument that Alito was referring to, didn't happen until February and the flags had been up since Jan 6th. So Alito's excuse for his wife putting up the flags doesn't add up.
 
I hope Alito's wife's commitment to the Cause is such that she doesn't mind Alito tactically throwing her under the bus.
 
Eve heard the call of Satan and doomed life in paradise. All the daughters of Eve are therefore responsible for sin in this world. Sex, childbirth and death happened because of Eve, along with all the ills that Satan has heaped upon the world. Alito throwing his wife under the bus is exactly where women deserve to be according to many fundamentalist Christians.
 
Could be a joint enterprise. For the small cost of her being blamed, the two of them gain an insurrectionist flag flown at the home of a SC Justice.

I mean, his response was, "My wife is the flag-flyer in the family," but pointedly not, "I disavow the message sent by that flag."
 
Top Bottom