"Do I Contradict Myself? ...I Am Large" I Oppress Millions
Apologies to the Brooklyn Bard
According to Adam Liptak’s report in the print edition of the NY Times today (12/10/24) Supreme Court conservatives just made fools of themselves again. This is my interpretation, of the decisions, not his. Alito claims the zip code admission policy used in a Boston elite school similar to the University of Texas policy is unconstitutional and he and others rejected the Wisconsin case opposing transcare for adolescents citing lack of standing: the plaintiffs were not affected. Well, neither were the Chinese students in the Harvard — North Carolina cases. A brazen lack of consistency, because they accepted the cases and ruled for the students.
Is the new conservative methodology reckless? Why yes! We have before us a record from free speech wedding cakes, to presumptive wedding planning, to immunity manufactured from the proverbial whole cloth, to the supposed disappearance of racism in the former confederate states regarding voting rights. These were based on lies and refusals to pay attention to the facts instead of fantasy. John Roberts and his orginalist magi are leading us back to the thinking of the pre-Warren court where obfuscation governed the rulings to maintain the supremacy of Christian whites and and the power of bosses over workers. It turns out that the Reconstruction court and the Warren court were the aberrations not Plessy and its Jim Crow heritage.
100% correct. But I have one quibble. I refuse to follow the prevailing usage and call the right-wing majority on the Court "conservative." Call them right-wing, call them reactionary, but they are not conservative.
I grew up wth the Warren Court and just assumed that the court would also be progressive in the way it interpreted law. But in the past our years I realize how retro the rulings of those years really are.