Some homework, to cheer you up.
Jan. 31st, 2006 11:48 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumForgetting, for the moment, the mindset of an Alito, pe se. akirlu pointed something out in comments which gave me cheer.
Ponder someone who's judicial philosophy you hate (and unless the system is broken beyond repair, no matter what your politics, someone whom you don't like will get to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court).
What is the affect on the court?
It depends on the judge. If the justice is too far out, he will be lost. The shape (with some exceptions, like Youngstown Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) where most people tend to reach for part of Jackson's concurrence) the writer of the opinion is the one who shapes the law.
It's true, the decision affects the litigants, the opinion affects the law.
So go and read, "The Brethren" by Woodward and Bernstein. It's in the library, so you won't need to buy it.
As the old saw goes, "there's many a slip, twixt the cup and the lip." Which the book points out.
Opinions are assigned after a vote; which is indicative of the Court's decision. The decision, however, isn't final until the opinion is handed down, and things change. An opinion which is too extreme will lose votes, perhaps even changing the outcome of the case.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (USSC+) was worked over a fair bit, so that it would be a unanimous decision.
Back to the present.
Looking at the history of Justice (sigh) Alito on the bench, and the large number of his cases where he was alone in dissent, or later overturned, it may be safe to say that he could have trouble getting his opinions handed down.
Someone said "Roe" now rests on the slim shoulders of Kennedy. Perhaps. It is also possible that Alito will be so over the line in his writing that justices who agree with him on the decision, can't support him in the opinion. That could make for a lot of concurrence from him, but not so many opinions. It may also be that his views lead some to decide the merits of the case are different from what they appeared to be when the first vote was taken.
It's bad, but it might not be unmitigated.
At the very least we can hope this makes those who look to single issues (like abortion, instead of the underlying rights to privacy and autonomy) ponder what deals they make with the Devil to get the thing they want.
akirlu pointed something out in comments which gave me cheer.Ponder someone who's judicial philosophy you hate (and unless the system is broken beyond repair, no matter what your politics, someone whom you don't like will get to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court).
What is the affect on the court?
It depends on the judge. If the justice is too far out, he will be lost. The shape (with some exceptions, like Youngstown Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) where most people tend to reach for part of Jackson's concurrence) the writer of the opinion is the one who shapes the law.
It's true, the decision affects the litigants, the opinion affects the law.
So go and read, "The Brethren" by Woodward and Bernstein. It's in the library, so you won't need to buy it.
As the old saw goes, "there's many a slip, twixt the cup and the lip." Which the book points out.
Opinions are assigned after a vote; which is indicative of the Court's decision. The decision, however, isn't final until the opinion is handed down, and things change. An opinion which is too extreme will lose votes, perhaps even changing the outcome of the case.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (USSC+) was worked over a fair bit, so that it would be a unanimous decision.
Back to the present.
Looking at the history of Justice (sigh) Alito on the bench, and the large number of his cases where he was alone in dissent, or later overturned, it may be safe to say that he could have trouble getting his opinions handed down.
Someone said "Roe" now rests on the slim shoulders of Kennedy. Perhaps. It is also possible that Alito will be so over the line in his writing that justices who agree with him on the decision, can't support him in the opinion. That could make for a lot of concurrence from him, but not so many opinions. It may also be that his views lead some to decide the merits of the case are different from what they appeared to be when the first vote was taken.
It's bad, but it might not be unmitigated.
At the very least we can hope this makes those who look to single issues (like abortion, instead of the underlying rights to privacy and autonomy) ponder what deals they make with the Devil to get the thing they want.
