|
Post by cindra on Jun 28, 2021 16:50:25 GMT -5
Alito is very famously a guy with reasonable opinions who isn't an ideological psycho. He for sure won't just invent some idea whole cloth to gut the VRA like roberts did with "equal sovereignty" in Shelby.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 29, 2021 11:03:12 GMT -5
Alito is very famously a guy with reasonable opinions who isn't an ideological psycho. He for sure won't just invent some idea whole cloth to gut the VRA like roberts did with "equal sovereignty" in Shelby. It will interesting to see how it comes out. Does Alito write something that 4-5 other justices agree with - or will this be something of a hogwash multi tiered opinions from several justices? Also will be interesting to see the dissent opinion on this and who writes it. Since it seems likely that Alito is writing the opinion for this case (and not Roberts) - then it is very possible that this will be a 5-4 decision with Roberts on the 4. In which case - I would expect Roberts to be writing the dissenting opinion (assigning it to himself). If a 6-3 decision - then Breyer will decide who among the 3 will be writing. I would rather read Kagan (I would also rather Kavanagh write the majority instead of Alito, but that will not happen).
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jun 29, 2021 11:07:17 GMT -5
......
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 29, 2021 11:16:02 GMT -5
Alito is very famously a guy with reasonable opinions who isn't an ideological psycho. He for sure won't just invent some idea whole cloth to gut the VRA like roberts did with "equal sovereignty" in Shelby. It will interesting to see how it comes out. Does Alito write something that 4-5 other justices agree with - or will this be something of a hogwash multi tiered opinions from several justices? Also will be interesting to see the dissent opinion on this and who writes it. Since it seems likely that Alito is writing the opinion for this case (and not Roberts) - then it is very possible that this will be a 5-4 decision with Roberts on the 4. In which case - I would expect Roberts to be writing the dissenting opinion (assigning it to himself). If a 6-3 decision - then Breyer will decide who among the 3 will be writing. I would rather read Kagan (I would also rather Kavanagh write the majority instead of Alito, but that will not happen). I hope you understand that dissenting opinions are not assigned by Roberts or anyone else. Each judge can write their own and/or sign on to another judge's opinion. The majority opinion, on the other hand, is assigned by the Chief Justice unless the Chief Justice was not part of the majority. (It's even slightly more complicated than this, because votes can change after the opinions are written, so the assigned majority opinion can turn into a dissent.)
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 29, 2021 13:11:21 GMT -5
It will interesting to see how it comes out. Does Alito write something that 4-5 other justices agree with - or will this be something of a hogwash multi tiered opinions from several justices? Also will be interesting to see the dissent opinion on this and who writes it. Since it seems likely that Alito is writing the opinion for this case (and not Roberts) - then it is very possible that this will be a 5-4 decision with Roberts on the 4. In which case - I would expect Roberts to be writing the dissenting opinion (assigning it to himself). If a 6-3 decision - then Breyer will decide who among the 3 will be writing. I would rather read Kagan (I would also rather Kavanagh write the majority instead of Alito, but that will not happen). I hope you understand that dissenting opinions are not assigned by Roberts or anyone else. Each judge can write their own and/or sign on to another judge's opinion. The majority opinion, on the other hand, is assigned by the Chief Justice unless the Chief Justice was not part of the majority. (It's even slightly more complicated than this, because votes can change after the opinions are written, so the assigned majority opinion can turn into a dissent.) It is my understanding - and I have read this in more than one place (which I could still be understanding wrong): The most senior justice on the majority assigns the writing of the opinion. The Chief Justice is always considered the most senior justice on whichever side he/she is on. And then the most senior justice on the minority assigns the dissenting opinion. Any other justice can write a concurring opinion. It is possible that there can be a justice that switches votes after these assignments that would change this. I am not totally sure this is correct on the dissenting opinion, but pretty sure on the majority opinion. Speculation is that Roberts would be writing this opinion as he almost always writes the opinion on the biggest cases of the year. But based on who has already written and the number of cases left - it would appear that it is ~ 90% likely that Alito is writing this opinion. That further leads to speculation that Roberts isn't in the majority (otherwise he would have assigned it to himself) and that Thomas must have assigned to Alito. This kind of points to a narrow 5-4 decision. It is also possible that several in the 5 (or 6) will not totally agree with Alito's reasoning and there are several much more narrow concurring opinions. www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/06/28/supreme_court_bingo_2021_edition_145995.html
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 29, 2021 13:48:13 GMT -5
I hope you understand that dissenting opinions are not assigned by Roberts or anyone else. Each judge can write their own and/or sign on to another judge's opinion. The majority opinion, on the other hand, is assigned by the Chief Justice unless the Chief Justice was not part of the majority. (It's even slightly more complicated than this, because votes can change after the opinions are written, so the assigned majority opinion can turn into a dissent.) The most senior justice on the majority assigns the writing of the opinion. The Chief Justice is always considered the most senior justice on whichever side he/she is on. And then the most senior justice on the minority assigns the dissenting opinion. Any other justice can write a concurring opinion. It is possible that there can be a justice that switches votes after these assignments that would change this. I am not totally sure this is correct on the dissenting opinion, but pretty sure on the majority opinion. The most senior dissenting justice can assign someone to write the dissent, but any justice can write a dissenting opinion.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 29, 2021 13:49:25 GMT -5
Also, even as a law student, I find a conversation about who will write an opinion to be entirely uninteresting.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jun 29, 2021 15:00:20 GMT -5
Also, even as a law student, I find a conversation about who will write an opinion to be entirely uninteresting. After the fact it doesn't really matter - other than those that were better writers. It is interesting to me and some before the decision - as it can foretell the decision results. A Roberts written 6-3 decision will look much different than an Alito 5-4 decision.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 2, 2021 8:50:01 GMT -5
So - Biden condemns the Bronovich ruling yesterday as an assault on voting rights and implies racism at work. However, his administration had concluded that the 2 Arizona measures do not violate Section 2 and found no basis for discrimination in the 2 laws. Again - this is about politics. Biden and the Democratic party wants the issue - and dearly want to attach the issue of discrimination and voter suppression even when they legally believe it is not the case. electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Brnovich-letter1.pdf
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2021 21:45:45 GMT -5
The GOP is actively trying to suppress voter turnout because they know it's the only way they can win non-local elections and you think it's all about DEMOCRATIC politics?
OK then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2021 21:48:11 GMT -5
You want an example of a party feigning outrage? Look no further than CRT. Or the multitude of other issues the GOP lies about to motivate their base.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 3, 2021 12:47:34 GMT -5
The GOP is actively trying to suppress voter turnout because they know it's the only way they can win non-local elections and you think it's all about DEMOCRATIC politics? OK then. The Republican party is mostly trash. Doesn't change the fact of Democratic party hypocrisy here.
|
|
moody
Banned
Posts: 18,679
|
Post by moody on Jul 3, 2021 16:52:55 GMT -5
The GOP is actively trying to suppress voter turnout because they know it's the only way they can win non-local elections and you think it's all about DEMOCRATIC politics? OK then. The Republican party is mostly trash. Doesn't change the fact of Democratic party hypocrisy here. what part of the Republican party is NOT trash?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2021 18:52:09 GMT -5
The GOP is actively trying to suppress voter turnout because they know it's the only way they can win non-local elections and you think it's all about DEMOCRATIC politics? OK then. The Republican party is mostly trash. Doesn't change the fact of Democratic party hypocrisy here. I would agree if there was hypocrisy in this. I just do not see it. Nor do I think there is any equivalence. The Dems are actively working to make sure people can vote. Sure that benefits them, but how is that a bad thing? The GOP is actively working to prevent people from voting -- and are using false justifications for it. How is that remotely equivalent?
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,447
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 4, 2021 22:07:59 GMT -5
The Republican party is mostly trash. Doesn't change the fact of Democratic party hypocrisy here. I would agree if there was hypocrisy in this. I just do not see it. Nor do I think there is any equivalence. The Dems are actively working to make sure people can vote. Sure that benefits them, but how is that a bad thing? The GOP is actively working to prevent people from voting -- and are using false justifications for it. How is that remotely equivalent? The dishonesty/hypocrisy: The Biden Administration wrote a letter on the Brnovich cash saying they didn't not disagree with the conclusion that the Arizona law did not violate Section 2 of the VRA. In other words - they agreed with what was the eventual opinion of the 6-3 majority. Then after the opinion was announced - Biden writes how the decision and the SC undercuts the VRA. In the dark - they agree with the decision - outlawing voter harvesting and votes made in the wrong precinct (and essentially using the wrong ballot) doesn't violate the VRA. In the public light, he says the opposite. Why? Purely political. He knows darn well there is nothing legally wrong with the AZ law, but the politics of the issue (voter suppression) is very important to the Democratic base. It is a continued lie.
|
|