One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Conservative Justices Surprise With Swing Votes
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 next>>
Jul 2, 2019 23:21:55   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
"However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/conservative-justices-surprise-court-watchers-with-swing-votes/ar-AADJY5N?ocid=spartandhp

The Supreme Court is settling into its new conservative majority, but rulings from the recently wrapped-up term show that right-leaning justices don't see eye-to-eye on some of the highest-profile cases.

While the additions of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh - both appointed by President Trump - have shifted the high court to the right, the newest members and Chief Justice John Roberts surprised court watchers by occasionally forging unlikely alliances with their liberal counterparts on the bench.

Roberts came through as the swing vote in the ruling against adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, while Gorsuch twice in the court's final week joined the liberal bloc to strike down criminal statutes.

Kavanaugh similarly raised eyebrows earlier in the term when he ruled against Apple in an antitrust case that caused some of the country's staunchest conservatives to question his loyalty to the president who appointed him.

Legal experts agree that none of the conservative justices has clearly emerged as a swing vote, the role played by former Justice Anthony Kennedy ahead of his retirement last year. But that doesn't mean the three justices will necessarily stick to the conservative line going forward.

"Collectively, we may have the three of them acting as swing votes in a number of different areas," Susan Bloch, a law professor at Georgetown University, told The Hill.

As Kavanaugh adjusted to his new position on the Supreme Court, he generally stayed close to his more right-leaning allies. Data collected by statistician Adam Feldman for SCOTUSblog shows that Kavanaugh was most fully aligned with Roberts during the term, siding with the chief justice at least partially 94 percent of the time.

However, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch had a significant amount of daylight between their rulings: They agreed 70 percent of the time, the lowest percentage of agreement that Kavanaugh had with other conservative members of the court. Only Gorsuch's alignment with Roberts was lower, at 68 percent.
Bloch said she wasn't necessarily surprised that two justices appointed by the same president weren't always on the same page when it came to Supreme Court opinions.

"What page they're on is harder to predict," she added.

Feldman, who also runs the blog Empirical SCOTUS, told The Hill that, as a first-term justice still learning the ropes, it's not surprising that Kavanaugh was aligned closely with other conservatives on the bench.
He added that after facing a tumultuous confirmation process with high-profile allegations of sexual assault, Kavanaugh may have sought to maintain a low profile during his first year on the court.

But Bloch offered a different viewpoint, saying she believed Kavanaugh was ruling on each case based on its legal merits, and not in any way reflective of how he got on the bench.

"I'm sure he hated the confirmation process, but I would be surprised if he's trying to do anything other than hope people forget about it," Bloch said. "I can't imagine he's trying to sort of strategically vote with the confirmation process in mind, partly because I don't think that's the way he thinks and partly because I think it's an impossible task."

The newest member of the court was the swing vote in only one case this term, siding with the liberal justices to find that a class-action lawsuit against Apple over app prices can move forward.

That ruling sparked some criticism from conservatives like Ben Shapiro and Rush Limbaugh, who said Kavanaugh's decision played into some concerns they had surrounding just how far to the right he would rule.

Feldman's data shows that Gorsuch was the conservative justice who most frequently crossed the ideological divide to side with liberals in split decisions, serving as the fifth vote in those 5-4 rulings. He did so four times during the term.

Still, Gorsuch tended to break with the conservative majority on challenges to criminal statutes. He was the fifth vote last month for an opinion that struck down a federal law that authorized further charges for gun offenses relating to "a crime of violence," writing in the court's majority opinion that the statute was "too vague."

Gorsuch pulled a repeat performance just two days later, finding that a statute on mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders who violate the terms of their supervised release was unconstitutional.
Feldman said that Gorsuch, much like Kennedy, tends to branch out on his own when it comes to cases involving individual liberties. His higher percentage of splitting from the conservative majority may be more of an indication of the kinds of cases the Supreme Court heard this past term than anything else, Feldman added.

However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term.

Feldman also found that this past term offered the most varied lineups in rulings since Roberts was tapped as chief justice in 2005, with 10 different groupings of the justices appearing in opinions.

Even as the court's ideological spectrum shifts to the right, Feldman noted that Roberts remains a conservative who tends to vote accordingly.

For example, Roberts delivered the fifth vote in the court's ruling last week that federal courts can't rule on claims of partisan gerrymandering, a victory for conservatives.

However, both Feldman and Bloch cited Roberts's reputation as an institutionalist who seeks to preserve the integrity of the court from political attacks as helping to make him a key vote in some of the most high-profile and divisive cases.

Feldman pointed to Roberts's swing vote in last week's 5-4 ruling in the census citizenship question decision as him potentially playing that role yet again; he provided the swing vote in the Supreme Court's previous ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act.

The census citizenship question ruling is "a great example of a case where Roberts would be particularly pensive and practical about where his position was, because a case like that has political implications that a lot of people that might not otherwise follow the court probably pay attention to," Feldman said.

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 00:50:00   #
Larai (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
"However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/conservative-justices-surprise-court-watchers-with-swing-votes/ar-AADJY5N?ocid=spartandhp

The Supreme Court is settling into its new conservative majority, but rulings from the recently wrapped-up term show that right-leaning justices don't see eye-to-eye on some of the highest-profile cases.

While the additions of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh - both appointed by President Trump - have shifted the high court to the right, the newest members and Chief Justice John Roberts surprised court watchers by occasionally forging unlikely alliances with their liberal counterparts on the bench.

Roberts came through as the swing vote in the ruling against adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, while Gorsuch twice in the court's final week joined the liberal bloc to strike down criminal statutes.

Kavanaugh similarly raised eyebrows earlier in the term when he ruled against Apple in an antitrust case that caused some of the country's staunchest conservatives to question his loyalty to the president who appointed him.

Legal experts agree that none of the conservative justices has clearly emerged as a swing vote, the role played by former Justice Anthony Kennedy ahead of his retirement last year. But that doesn't mean the three justices will necessarily stick to the conservative line going forward.

"Collectively, we may have the three of them acting as swing votes in a number of different areas," Susan Bloch, a law professor at Georgetown University, told The Hill.

As Kavanaugh adjusted to his new position on the Supreme Court, he generally stayed close to his more right-leaning allies. Data collected by statistician Adam Feldman for SCOTUSblog shows that Kavanaugh was most fully aligned with Roberts during the term, siding with the chief justice at least partially 94 percent of the time.

However, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch had a significant amount of daylight between their rulings: They agreed 70 percent of the time, the lowest percentage of agreement that Kavanaugh had with other conservative members of the court. Only Gorsuch's alignment with Roberts was lower, at 68 percent.
Bloch said she wasn't necessarily surprised that two justices appointed by the same president weren't always on the same page when it came to Supreme Court opinions.

"What page they're on is harder to predict," she added.

Feldman, who also runs the blog Empirical SCOTUS, told The Hill that, as a first-term justice still learning the ropes, it's not surprising that Kavanaugh was aligned closely with other conservatives on the bench.
He added that after facing a tumultuous confirmation process with high-profile allegations of sexual assault, Kavanaugh may have sought to maintain a low profile during his first year on the court.

But Bloch offered a different viewpoint, saying she believed Kavanaugh was ruling on each case based on its legal merits, and not in any way reflective of how he got on the bench.

"I'm sure he hated the confirmation process, but I would be surprised if he's trying to do anything other than hope people forget about it," Bloch said. "I can't imagine he's trying to sort of strategically vote with the confirmation process in mind, partly because I don't think that's the way he thinks and partly because I think it's an impossible task."

The newest member of the court was the swing vote in only one case this term, siding with the liberal justices to find that a class-action lawsuit against Apple over app prices can move forward.

That ruling sparked some criticism from conservatives like Ben Shapiro and Rush Limbaugh, who said Kavanaugh's decision played into some concerns they had surrounding just how far to the right he would rule.

Feldman's data shows that Gorsuch was the conservative justice who most frequently crossed the ideological divide to side with liberals in split decisions, serving as the fifth vote in those 5-4 rulings. He did so four times during the term.

Still, Gorsuch tended to break with the conservative majority on challenges to criminal statutes. He was the fifth vote last month for an opinion that struck down a federal law that authorized further charges for gun offenses relating to "a crime of violence," writing in the court's majority opinion that the statute was "too vague."

Gorsuch pulled a repeat performance just two days later, finding that a statute on mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders who violate the terms of their supervised release was unconstitutional.
Feldman said that Gorsuch, much like Kennedy, tends to branch out on his own when it comes to cases involving individual liberties. His higher percentage of splitting from the conservative majority may be more of an indication of the kinds of cases the Supreme Court heard this past term than anything else, Feldman added.

However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term.

Feldman also found that this past term offered the most varied lineups in rulings since Roberts was tapped as chief justice in 2005, with 10 different groupings of the justices appearing in opinions.

Even as the court's ideological spectrum shifts to the right, Feldman noted that Roberts remains a conservative who tends to vote accordingly.

For example, Roberts delivered the fifth vote in the court's ruling last week that federal courts can't rule on claims of partisan gerrymandering, a victory for conservatives.

However, both Feldman and Bloch cited Roberts's reputation as an institutionalist who seeks to preserve the integrity of the court from political attacks as helping to make him a key vote in some of the most high-profile and divisive cases.

Feldman pointed to Roberts's swing vote in last week's 5-4 ruling in the census citizenship question decision as him potentially playing that role yet again; he provided the swing vote in the Supreme Court's previous ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act.

The census citizenship question ruling is "a great example of a case where Roberts would be particularly pensive and practical about where his position was, because a case like that has political implications that a lot of people that might not otherwise follow the court probably pay attention to," Feldman said.
"However, the conservative justices weren't t... (show quote)


Wow! Nice post...I could be wrong.. but aren't judges supposed to be impartial and no matter their political affiliation.. they take an oath to be impartial.. in politics there has been here of late.. say the last 20 years maybe.. of the dems say the Gop isn't compromising.. the gop says the same thing when it comes to legislation and such..is this sentiment the same for judges? but again I could be wrong.. been known to happen!

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 01:24:26   #
PeterS (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
"However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/conservative-justices-surprise-court-watchers-with-swing-votes/ar-AADJY5N?ocid=spartandhp

The Supreme Court is settling into its new conservative majority, but rulings from the recently wrapped-up term show that right-leaning justices don't see eye-to-eye on some of the highest-profile cases.

While the additions of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh - both appointed by President Trump - have shifted the high court to the right, the newest members and Chief Justice John Roberts surprised court watchers by occasionally forging unlikely alliances with their liberal counterparts on the bench.

Roberts came through as the swing vote in the ruling against adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, while Gorsuch twice in the court's final week joined the liberal bloc to strike down criminal statutes.

Kavanaugh similarly raised eyebrows earlier in the term when he ruled against Apple in an antitrust case that caused some of the country's staunchest conservatives to question his loyalty to the president who appointed him.

Legal experts agree that none of the conservative justices has clearly emerged as a swing vote, the role played by former Justice Anthony Kennedy ahead of his retirement last year. But that doesn't mean the three justices will necessarily stick to the conservative line going forward.

"Collectively, we may have the three of them acting as swing votes in a number of different areas," Susan Bloch, a law professor at Georgetown University, told The Hill.

As Kavanaugh adjusted to his new position on the Supreme Court, he generally stayed close to his more right-leaning allies. Data collected by statistician Adam Feldman for SCOTUSblog shows that Kavanaugh was most fully aligned with Roberts during the term, siding with the chief justice at least partially 94 percent of the time.

However, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch had a significant amount of daylight between their rulings: They agreed 70 percent of the time, the lowest percentage of agreement that Kavanaugh had with other conservative members of the court. Only Gorsuch's alignment with Roberts was lower, at 68 percent.
Bloch said she wasn't necessarily surprised that two justices appointed by the same president weren't always on the same page when it came to Supreme Court opinions.

"What page they're on is harder to predict," she added.

Feldman, who also runs the blog Empirical SCOTUS, told The Hill that, as a first-term justice still learning the ropes, it's not surprising that Kavanaugh was aligned closely with other conservatives on the bench.
He added that after facing a tumultuous confirmation process with high-profile allegations of sexual assault, Kavanaugh may have sought to maintain a low profile during his first year on the court.

But Bloch offered a different viewpoint, saying she believed Kavanaugh was ruling on each case based on its legal merits, and not in any way reflective of how he got on the bench.

"I'm sure he hated the confirmation process, but I would be surprised if he's trying to do anything other than hope people forget about it," Bloch said. "I can't imagine he's trying to sort of strategically vote with the confirmation process in mind, partly because I don't think that's the way he thinks and partly because I think it's an impossible task."

The newest member of the court was the swing vote in only one case this term, siding with the liberal justices to find that a class-action lawsuit against Apple over app prices can move forward.

That ruling sparked some criticism from conservatives like Ben Shapiro and Rush Limbaugh, who said Kavanaugh's decision played into some concerns they had surrounding just how far to the right he would rule.

Feldman's data shows that Gorsuch was the conservative justice who most frequently crossed the ideological divide to side with liberals in split decisions, serving as the fifth vote in those 5-4 rulings. He did so four times during the term.

Still, Gorsuch tended to break with the conservative majority on challenges to criminal statutes. He was the fifth vote last month for an opinion that struck down a federal law that authorized further charges for gun offenses relating to "a crime of violence," writing in the court's majority opinion that the statute was "too vague."

Gorsuch pulled a repeat performance just two days later, finding that a statute on mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders who violate the terms of their supervised release was unconstitutional.
Feldman said that Gorsuch, much like Kennedy, tends to branch out on his own when it comes to cases involving individual liberties. His higher percentage of splitting from the conservative majority may be more of an indication of the kinds of cases the Supreme Court heard this past term than anything else, Feldman added.

However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term.

Feldman also found that this past term offered the most varied lineups in rulings since Roberts was tapped as chief justice in 2005, with 10 different groupings of the justices appearing in opinions.

Even as the court's ideological spectrum shifts to the right, Feldman noted that Roberts remains a conservative who tends to vote accordingly.

For example, Roberts delivered the fifth vote in the court's ruling last week that federal courts can't rule on claims of partisan gerrymandering, a victory for conservatives.

However, both Feldman and Bloch cited Roberts's reputation as an institutionalist who seeks to preserve the integrity of the court from political attacks as helping to make him a key vote in some of the most high-profile and divisive cases.

Feldman pointed to Roberts's swing vote in last week's 5-4 ruling in the census citizenship question decision as him potentially playing that role yet again; he provided the swing vote in the Supreme Court's previous ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act.

The census citizenship question ruling is "a great example of a case where Roberts would be particularly pensive and practical about where his position was because a case like that has political implications that a lot of people that might not otherwise follow the court probably pay attention to," Feldman said.
"However, the conservative justices weren't t... (show quote)

I have a feeling that Roberts is going to assume more of Kennedy's role. He took a great deal of offense at the presidents suggestion that they were impartial and he seems to be one more concerned with the rule of law and not ideology...

As usual, an excellent post...

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 01:31:01   #
Larai (a regular here)
 
PeterS wrote:
I have a feeling that Roberts is going to assume more of Kennedy's role. He took a great deal of offense at the presidents suggestion that they were impartial and he seems to be one more concerned with the rule of law and not ideology...

As usual, an excellent post...


Yours is also an excellent post! All I can say.. is that the Judges need to stand by that Impartiality..Contrary to popular presidential opinion.. the Judges are NOT the "Good ol' boys" network.. Sadly, when a Pres. appoints a judge I truly believe that they down the road expect judicial favors.. again could be wrong, but I am conservative.. I'm just calling a spade a spade.. This goes for Any President.. On either side of the isle. that opinion is Not exclusive to republican presidents.

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 02:06:18   #
PeterS (a regular here)
 
Larai wrote:
Yours is also an excellent post! All I can say.. is that the Judges need to stand by that Impartiality..Contrary to popular presidential opinion.. the Judges are NOT the "Good ol' boys" network.. Sadly, when a Pres. appoints a judge I truly believe that they down the road expect judicial favors.. again could be wrong, but I am conservative.. I'm just calling a spade a spade.. This goes for Any President.. On either side of the isle. that opinion is Not exclusive to Republican presidents.
Yours is also an excellent post! All I can say.. i... (show quote)

Thanks and welcome to the board. And one thing for sure, if Trump appoints someone he only does it because he expects political favors somewhere down the road. That was why he was always so disappointed in Sessions...

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 02:26:05   #
Larai (a regular here)
 
PeterS wrote:
Thanks and welcome to the board. And one thing for sure, if Trump appoints someone he only does it because he expects political favors somewhere down the road. That was why he was always so disappointed in Sessions...


Thank you for the welcome.. But as you can see by my post I included Both sides of the isle in it.. "political favors" are Not mutally exclusive to the GOP. The GOP much like the Dems have lost sight of a lot of things to do with protecting this country & it's people. I am an admitted conservative, and near as I can tell Trump has done way more to that end than Obama ever did or Clinton (Bill Not Hitlary) I sometimes tend to be an equal opportunity offender.. I think Both sides are mostly Fulla shit, but hey we work with what we have.. which is the vote.. other than that..we really have no control over what goes on in the house or senate... We the people elected these fools to represent us..So I guess we reap what we sow.

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 02:31:58   #
Larai (a regular here)
 
Larai wrote:
Thank you for the welcome.. But as you can see by my post I included Both sides of the isle in it.. "political favors" are Not mutally exclusive to the GOP. The GOP much like the Dems have lost sight of a lot of things to do with protecting this country & it's people. I am an admitted conservative, and near as I can tell Trump has done way more to that end than Obama ever did or Clinton (Bill Not Hitlary) I sometimes tend to be an equal opportunity offender.. I think Both sides are mostly Fulla shit, but hey we work with what we have.. which is the vote.. other than that..we really have no control over what goes on in the house or senate... We the people elected these fools to represent us..So I guess we reap what we sow.
Thank you for the welcome.. But as you can see by ... (show quote)


Also, I am NOT a GOP conservative. I am a Constitutional Conservative.. Big Difference!.. Some might call me a "Libertarian" Not to be confused with liberal..I don't Need Big brother Up in my business.. I don't need them to tell me what to eat.. to tell me what & how to think.. I need them to leave me the Fk alone... I am a big girl I have been taking care of myself for Many years thank you very much...

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 02:57:26   #
PeterS (a regular here)
 
Larai wrote:
Thank you for the welcome.. But as you can see by my post I included Both sides of the isle in it.. "political favors" are Not mutally exclusive to the GOP. The GOP much like the Dems have lost sight of a lot of things to do with protecting this country & it's people. I am an admitted conservative, and near as I can tell Trump has done way more to that end than Obama ever did or Clinton (Bill Not Hitlary) I sometimes tend to be an equal opportunity offender.. I think Both sides are mostly Fulla shit, but hey we work with what we have.. which is the vote.. other than that..we really have no control over what goes on in the house or senate... We the people elected these fools to represent us..So I guess we reap what we sow.
Thank you for the welcome.. But as you can see by ... (show quote)

Well, be careful. Conservatives on this site aren't the most gracious and if you don't agree with them 100% they can get quite nasty. Like I said, I hope you enjoy your stay here and it's always nice to have new blood may it never be spilled on this site that is...

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 03:02:42   #
Larai (a regular here)
 
PeterS wrote:
Well, be careful. Conservatives on this site aren't the most gracious and if you don't agree with them 100% they can get quite nasty. Like I said, I hope you enjoy your stay here and it's always nice to have new blood may it never be spilled on this site that is...


Thanks for the heads up.. and thank you again for the welcome.. I hope my blood isn't spilt. but so far. since yesterday.. I have had more blood letting from the Liberal side of the isle while so far everyone conservative on this site that has interacted with me have agreed with my pretty profusely.. But I reckon we shall see.. as I implied I don't always agree with the GOP..

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 06:56:57   #
bylm1-Bernie (a regular here)
 
PeterS wrote:
Thanks and welcome to the board. And one thing for sure, if Trump appoints someone he only does it because he expects political favors somewhere down the road. That was why he was always so disappointed in Sessions...



Have to take issue with you, Pete. There is absolutely no way you can know what President Trump expected when he appointed Gorsuch and Kavanaugh any more than any other President when he appointed a justice. The reason he was disappointed with Sessions was simply because Sessions was a wimp, not wanting to do what an Attorney General is supposed to do.

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 07:03:54   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
Thanks, Larai and Peter, for your responses. The article caught my eye for the very reason that, IMO, SCOTUS appointees should be reasonably unpredictable. Votes on cases before the court should be based on the law as written and not partisan/ideological alignment. These few examples, at the very least, show promise in that they seem to suggest the former by the current SCOTUS. Hopefully, that trend will continue.

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 07:04:04   #
badbob85037
 
slatten49 wrote:
"However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/conservative-justices-surprise-court-watchers-with-swing-votes/ar-AADJY5N?ocid=spartandhp

The Supreme Court is settling into its new conservative majority, but rulings from the recently wrapped-up term show that right-leaning justices don't see eye-to-eye on some of the highest-profile cases.

While the additions of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh - both appointed by President Trump - have shifted the high court to the right, the newest members and Chief Justice John Roberts surprised court watchers by occasionally forging unlikely alliances with their liberal counterparts on the bench.

Roberts came through as the swing vote in the ruling against adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, while Gorsuch twice in the court's final week joined the liberal bloc to strike down criminal statutes.

Kavanaugh similarly raised eyebrows earlier in the term when he ruled against Apple in an antitrust case that caused some of the country's staunchest conservatives to question his loyalty to the president who appointed him.

Legal experts agree that none of the conservative justices has clearly emerged as a swing vote, the role played by former Justice Anthony Kennedy ahead of his retirement last year. But that doesn't mean the three justices will necessarily stick to the conservative line going forward.

"Collectively, we may have the three of them acting as swing votes in a number of different areas," Susan Bloch, a law professor at Georgetown University, told The Hill.

As Kavanaugh adjusted to his new position on the Supreme Court, he generally stayed close to his more right-leaning allies. Data collected by statistician Adam Feldman for SCOTUSblog shows that Kavanaugh was most fully aligned with Roberts during the term, siding with the chief justice at least partially 94 percent of the time.

However, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch had a significant amount of daylight between their rulings: They agreed 70 percent of the time, the lowest percentage of agreement that Kavanaugh had with other conservative members of the court. Only Gorsuch's alignment with Roberts was lower, at 68 percent.
Bloch said she wasn't necessarily surprised that two justices appointed by the same president weren't always on the same page when it came to Supreme Court opinions.

"What page they're on is harder to predict," she added.

Feldman, who also runs the blog Empirical SCOTUS, told The Hill that, as a first-term justice still learning the ropes, it's not surprising that Kavanaugh was aligned closely with other conservatives on the bench.
He added that after facing a tumultuous confirmation process with high-profile allegations of sexual assault, Kavanaugh may have sought to maintain a low profile during his first year on the court.

But Bloch offered a different viewpoint, saying she believed Kavanaugh was ruling on each case based on its legal merits, and not in any way reflective of how he got on the bench.

"I'm sure he hated the confirmation process, but I would be surprised if he's trying to do anything other than hope people forget about it," Bloch said. "I can't imagine he's trying to sort of strategically vote with the confirmation process in mind, partly because I don't think that's the way he thinks and partly because I think it's an impossible task."

The newest member of the court was the swing vote in only one case this term, siding with the liberal justices to find that a class-action lawsuit against Apple over app prices can move forward.

That ruling sparked some criticism from conservatives like Ben Shapiro and Rush Limbaugh, who said Kavanaugh's decision played into some concerns they had surrounding just how far to the right he would rule.

Feldman's data shows that Gorsuch was the conservative justice who most frequently crossed the ideological divide to side with liberals in split decisions, serving as the fifth vote in those 5-4 rulings. He did so four times during the term.

Still, Gorsuch tended to break with the conservative majority on challenges to criminal statutes. He was the fifth vote last month for an opinion that struck down a federal law that authorized further charges for gun offenses relating to "a crime of violence," writing in the court's majority opinion that the statute was "too vague."

Gorsuch pulled a repeat performance just two days later, finding that a statute on mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders who violate the terms of their supervised release was unconstitutional.
Feldman said that Gorsuch, much like Kennedy, tends to branch out on his own when it comes to cases involving individual liberties. His higher percentage of splitting from the conservative majority may be more of an indication of the kinds of cases the Supreme Court heard this past term than anything else, Feldman added.

However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term.

Feldman also found that this past term offered the most varied lineups in rulings since Roberts was tapped as chief justice in 2005, with 10 different groupings of the justices appearing in opinions.

Even as the court's ideological spectrum shifts to the right, Feldman noted that Roberts remains a conservative who tends to vote accordingly.

For example, Roberts delivered the fifth vote in the court's ruling last week that federal courts can't rule on claims of partisan gerrymandering, a victory for conservatives.

However, both Feldman and Bloch cited Roberts's reputation as an institutionalist who seeks to preserve the integrity of the court from political attacks as helping to make him a key vote in some of the most high-profile and divisive cases.

Feldman pointed to Roberts's swing vote in last week's 5-4 ruling in the census citizenship question decision as him potentially playing that role yet again; he provided the swing vote in the Supreme Court's previous ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act.

The census citizenship question ruling is "a great example of a case where Roberts would be particularly pensive and practical about where his position was, because a case like that has political implications that a lot of people that might not otherwise follow the court probably pay attention to," Feldman said.
"However, the conservative justices weren't t... (show quote)


No matter how I look at it the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say government needs to provide us anything besides being left alone to run our own life as long as it doesn't interfere with another's. The Supreme court to have any split votes just shows some should not be setting on that court as the Constitution was written quite clear.

Example, the Bill of Rights uses the term "The right of the people" many times. Yet as it is used in the Second Amendment near half the court ruled it didn't mean "the right of the people". Meaning near half the court are ruling by what they want ignoring the Constitution. I won't go in to what our school text books teach our children about the meaning of the Constitution.

Roberts vote on the Affordable Care Act makes me think someone has something on him he doesn't want anyone to know. The bill allows government into our bank accounts, to lay fines on us, and as far as affordable my insurance has over doubled for half the coverage with a deductible that can never be reached. My daughter had to wait till an emergency beeper was going off on her heart pace maker before they would change the battery. That is not health care and has nothing to do with being affordable. Government can't run the post office but now they run our health care? That is madness. How many hospitals have closed their doors in your area?

This latest vote on putting 'are you a US Citizen' on our census should have been a no brainer. The census is what determines the number of Representatives we send to Congress. So now we will have 22 million people here illegally in this country represented in the House and places like California only God knows how many are voting.

With retired judges like Stevens saying he was against the Second Amendment and tried to undermine it at every opportunity it seems we can't trust anyone.

The Supreme Court was the last branch of government one could trust. That is no longer the case.

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 07:17:19   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
badbob85037 wrote:
No matter how I look at it the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say government needs to provide us anything besides being left alone to run our own life as long as it doesn't interfere with another's. The Supreme court to have any split votes just shows some should not be setting on that court as the Constitution was written quite clear.

Example, the Bill of Rights uses the term "The right of the people" many times. Yet as it is used in the Second Amendment near half the court ruled it didn't mean "the right of the people". Meaning near half the court are ruling by what they want ignoring the Constitution. I won't go in to what our school text books teach our children about the meaning of the Constitution.

Roberts vote on the Affordable Care Act makes me think someone has something on him he doesn't want anyone to know. The bill allows government into our bank accounts, to lay fines on us, and as far as affordable my insurance has over doubled for half the coverage with a deductible that can never be reached. My daughter had to wait till an emergency beeper was going off on her heart pace maker before they would change the battery. That is not health care and has nothing to do with being affordable. Government can't run the post office but now they run our health care? That is madness. How many hospitals have closed their doors in your area?

This latest vote on putting 'are you a US Citizen' on our census should have been a no brainer. The census is what determines the number of Representatives we send to Congress. So now we will have 22 million people here illegally in this country represented in the House and places like California only God knows how many are voting.

The Supreme Court was the last branch of government one could trust. That is no longer the case.
No matter how I look at it the Affordable Care Act... (show quote)

I suspect many share your disappointment, Bob. Most of us have felt the same with one or more SCOTUS rulings. However, as the US Constitution dictates, SCOTUS makes the final decisions regarding the law of the land. Citizens have to learn the accept the reality of that...or be appointed to SCOTUS ourselves.

Life is accepting that we can't always have it our way.

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 07:59:18   #
zombinis3
 
badbob85037 wrote:
No matter how I look at it the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say government needs to provide us anything besides being left alone to run our own life as long as it doesn't interfere with another's. The Supreme court to have any split votes just shows some should not be setting on that court as the Constitution was written quite clear.

Example, the Bill of Rights uses the term "The right of the people" many times. Yet as it is used in the Second Amendment near half the court ruled it didn't mean "the right of the people". Meaning near half the court are ruling by what they want ignoring the Constitution. I won't go in to what our school text books teach our children about the meaning of the Constitution.

Roberts vote on the Affordable Care Act makes me think someone has something on him he doesn't want anyone to know. The bill allows government into our bank accounts, to lay fines on us, and as far as affordable my insurance has over doubled for half the coverage with a deductible that can never be reached. My daughter had to wait till an emergency beeper was going off on her heart pace maker before they would change the battery. That is not health care and has nothing to do with being affordable. Government can't run the post office but now they run our health care? That is madness. How many hospitals have closed their doors in your area?

This latest vote on putting 'are you a US Citizen' on our census should have been a no brainer. The census is what determines the number of Representatives we send to Congress. So now we will have 22 million people here illegally in this country represented in the House and places like California only God knows how many are voting.

With retired judges like Stevens saying he was against the Second Amendment and tried to undermine it at every opportunity it seems we can't trust anyone.

The Supreme Court was the last branch of government one could trust. That is no longer the case.
No matter how I look at it the Affordable Care Act... (show quote)


Pretty strong on everything stated with the small exception the Post office isn't ran by the government it is privately owned.

| Reply
Jul 3, 2019 08:15:24   #
lpnmajor (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
"However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/conservative-justices-surprise-court-watchers-with-swing-votes/ar-AADJY5N?ocid=spartandhp

The Supreme Court is settling into its new conservative majority, but rulings from the recently wrapped-up term show that right-leaning justices don't see eye-to-eye on some of the highest-profile cases.

While the additions of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh - both appointed by President Trump - have shifted the high court to the right, the newest members and Chief Justice John Roberts surprised court watchers by occasionally forging unlikely alliances with their liberal counterparts on the bench.

Roberts came through as the swing vote in the ruling against adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, while Gorsuch twice in the court's final week joined the liberal bloc to strike down criminal statutes.

Kavanaugh similarly raised eyebrows earlier in the term when he ruled against Apple in an antitrust case that caused some of the country's staunchest conservatives to question his loyalty to the president who appointed him.

Legal experts agree that none of the conservative justices has clearly emerged as a swing vote, the role played by former Justice Anthony Kennedy ahead of his retirement last year. But that doesn't mean the three justices will necessarily stick to the conservative line going forward.

"Collectively, we may have the three of them acting as swing votes in a number of different areas," Susan Bloch, a law professor at Georgetown University, told The Hill.

As Kavanaugh adjusted to his new position on the Supreme Court, he generally stayed close to his more right-leaning allies. Data collected by statistician Adam Feldman for SCOTUSblog shows that Kavanaugh was most fully aligned with Roberts during the term, siding with the chief justice at least partially 94 percent of the time.

However, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch had a significant amount of daylight between their rulings: They agreed 70 percent of the time, the lowest percentage of agreement that Kavanaugh had with other conservative members of the court. Only Gorsuch's alignment with Roberts was lower, at 68 percent.
Bloch said she wasn't necessarily surprised that two justices appointed by the same president weren't always on the same page when it came to Supreme Court opinions.

"What page they're on is harder to predict," she added.

Feldman, who also runs the blog Empirical SCOTUS, told The Hill that, as a first-term justice still learning the ropes, it's not surprising that Kavanaugh was aligned closely with other conservatives on the bench.
He added that after facing a tumultuous confirmation process with high-profile allegations of sexual assault, Kavanaugh may have sought to maintain a low profile during his first year on the court.

But Bloch offered a different viewpoint, saying she believed Kavanaugh was ruling on each case based on its legal merits, and not in any way reflective of how he got on the bench.

"I'm sure he hated the confirmation process, but I would be surprised if he's trying to do anything other than hope people forget about it," Bloch said. "I can't imagine he's trying to sort of strategically vote with the confirmation process in mind, partly because I don't think that's the way he thinks and partly because I think it's an impossible task."

The newest member of the court was the swing vote in only one case this term, siding with the liberal justices to find that a class-action lawsuit against Apple over app prices can move forward.

That ruling sparked some criticism from conservatives like Ben Shapiro and Rush Limbaugh, who said Kavanaugh's decision played into some concerns they had surrounding just how far to the right he would rule.

Feldman's data shows that Gorsuch was the conservative justice who most frequently crossed the ideological divide to side with liberals in split decisions, serving as the fifth vote in those 5-4 rulings. He did so four times during the term.

Still, Gorsuch tended to break with the conservative majority on challenges to criminal statutes. He was the fifth vote last month for an opinion that struck down a federal law that authorized further charges for gun offenses relating to "a crime of violence," writing in the court's majority opinion that the statute was "too vague."

Gorsuch pulled a repeat performance just two days later, finding that a statute on mandatory minimum sentences for sex offenders who violate the terms of their supervised release was unconstitutional.
Feldman said that Gorsuch, much like Kennedy, tends to branch out on his own when it comes to cases involving individual liberties. His higher percentage of splitting from the conservative majority may be more of an indication of the kinds of cases the Supreme Court heard this past term than anything else, Feldman added.

However, the conservative justices weren't the only ones to cross the ideological aisle: Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg each joined more conservative justices to create the majority in two separate 5-4 rulings this term.

Feldman also found that this past term offered the most varied lineups in rulings since Roberts was tapped as chief justice in 2005, with 10 different groupings of the justices appearing in opinions.

Even as the court's ideological spectrum shifts to the right, Feldman noted that Roberts remains a conservative who tends to vote accordingly.

For example, Roberts delivered the fifth vote in the court's ruling last week that federal courts can't rule on claims of partisan gerrymandering, a victory for conservatives.

However, both Feldman and Bloch cited Roberts's reputation as an institutionalist who seeks to preserve the integrity of the court from political attacks as helping to make him a key vote in some of the most high-profile and divisive cases.

Feldman pointed to Roberts's swing vote in last week's 5-4 ruling in the census citizenship question decision as him potentially playing that role yet again; he provided the swing vote in the Supreme Court's previous ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act.

The census citizenship question ruling is "a great example of a case where Roberts would be particularly pensive and practical about where his position was, because a case like that has political implications that a lot of people that might not otherwise follow the court probably pay attention to," Feldman said.
"However, the conservative justices weren't t... (show quote)


I'm wondering if those staunch conservatives questioned the justices loyalty to a President with a straight face. A Presidents oath, a member of Congresses oath and a Judges oath, are not to each other, a party, an ideology, indeed, are not to any human agency, but to the American people and their Constitution.

The fact that questions such as this are considered normal, should be alarming to every citizen, regardless of their politics or ideology.

| Reply
Page: 1 2 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.