Of course they do, Democrats do too. You can assess how ideological a conservative or liberal justice is by how much they vote with other conservative/liberal justices. If they do it all the time, then they’re ideological. If they cross over and vote with the other side, then they’re less ideological.
Conservative justices cross over and vote with liberal justices much more frequently than vice versa.
You’re siding with Ted Cruz if you think conservative justices being less ideological is a bad thing.
A Supreme Court justice isn’t a political figure, shouldn’t be one.
Some of us see them as making the right choices constitutionally and morally, with one or two conservative justices doing the same. Voting to make it harder to have abortions, for example, isn’t exactly a purely legal consideration uninfluenced by an ideology…
But it should be. The only question SCOTUS should answer is whether the Constitution speaks to the issue and what it says about it. There is little question to the answer of that question among honest people. That does not mean that a state law is right, wrong, moral, or immoral, but only as to the constitutionality of the law.
Yes. The Constitution is silent on the issue, meaning that the decision on how to handle the issue is reserved to the States. It has nothing to do with the morality of the law or the correctness of it, merely who has the power to regulate it.
Well, simply because they have ruled on it I think a legal argument could probably be made that you’re wrong in the case of abortions. I don’t have to make that argument, because the Supreme Court already has…
You got ideologues like Elena Kagan spewing stupid crap like the Supreme Court ruling to exempt Orthodox Jews from Covid restrictions, “As the COVID pandemic rages, the Court has failed to adequately protect the Nation’s voters.”
Since when is it the Supreme Court’s job to protect voters, clueless MFKA.
That quote was said regarding in-person vs. mail in voting. What do you disagree with out of the text below?
“The Court’s decision will disenfranchise large numbers of responsible voters in the midst of hazardous pandemic conditions,” Kagan wrote in her dissent, joined by liberal justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.
The justices were split 5-3, with the conservative majority negating a lower court’s ruling that had ordered mailed ballots to be counted if postmarked before Nov. 3 and received up to six days after Election Day, as they had been during the state’s primary.
In her dissent, Kagan noted that the COVID–19 pandemic “has turned in-person voting (with its often-long lines, touch screens, and enclosed booths) into a health risk.”
Coronavirus cases are mounting across the country, recently reaching a peak of 83,000 new daily cases nationwide. In Wisconsin, specifically, cases have skyrocketed up to a 7-day average of over 3,800 new daily cases— up from 674 average daily cases in early September.
“As the COVID pandemic rages, the Court has failed to adequately protect the Nation’s voters,” Kagan wrote.
