Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan:
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) December 4, 2025
"[T]his Court reverses that judgment based on its perusal, over a holiday weekend, of a cold paper record. We are a higher court than the District Court, but we are not a better one when it comes to making such a fact-based decision. That is… https://t.co/w4SIldTmfS
Scathing dissent from Justice Kagan:There was nothing wrong with the district court’s opinion. The majority just didn’t like it.
"[T]his Court reverses that judgment based on its perusal, over a holiday weekend, of a cold paper record. We are a higher court than the District Court, but we are not a better one when it comes to making such a fact-based decision. That is why we are supposed to use a clear-error standard of review—why we are supposed to uphold the District Court’s decision that race-based line-drawing occurred (even if we would have ruled differently) so long as it is plausible. Without so much as a word about that standard, this Court today announces that Texas may run next year's elections with a map the District Court found to have violated all our oft-repeated strictures about the use of race in districting. Today's order disrespects the work of a District Court that did everything one could ask to carry out its charge—that put aside every consideration except getting the issue before it right. And today's order disserves the millions of Texans whom the District Court found were assigned to their new districts based on their race. Because this Court's precedents and our Constitution demand better, I respectfully dissent."
This is what I mean when I say the appellate courts review the law, not the facts. Just as the majority says the legislature is entitled to deference, so, too, is the district court that heard the evidence in the case. But the conclusion of the district court after hearing the evidence being inconvenient to the majority on the Court, they simply set it aside, because “WE’RE THE SUPREME COURT, BITCHES!”
It’s time to remind the Court where Art. III falls in the Constitution, and how much authority the Constitution gives Congress over the Courts. As well as who holds the whip hand in amending the Constitution to say what it now needs to say.
Anyone who didn't expect the Roberts Court majority to try to ratfuck the election in favor of their party is denying reality. They are not only throughly and clearly partisan Republican, they are also white supremacist, certainly down to Clarence Thomas. That Black and Brown voters tend to not vote Republican has everything to do with their decision and it always does. John Roberts may run the most explicitly white supremacist court since the one led by Melville Fuller in 1896 and I'm not saying it's less white supremacist than that court was.
ReplyDeleteThe Supreme Court needs to be cut down to the kind of court that is compatible with egalitarian democracy.