5 ms·

Justice Jackson's dissent is honestly one of the most embarrassing things I've read from the Court and I've been reading most every opinion for years now. Heavy

Justice Jackson's dissent is honestly one of the most embarrassing things I've read from the Court and I've been reading most every opinion for years now. Heavy on the pathos, completely devoid of cogent legal theory. Kinda reminds me of Breyer, who, charitably, had an esoteric style. Kavanaugh is good to read on any topic - his writing is clear and often easily understandable by the layman. Gorsuch is an excellent writer as well. Those two are imo the best writers currently among the justices.

mjburgess 1y ago
They're both excellent judges in non-ideological cases, and many of Sotomayor's majority judgements read well and she's clearly very on-the-ball in orals. It's a shame in these cases -- I think Sotomayor is more of an ideologue than Thomas.
- threemux 1y ago
  Yeah you can certainly criticize Thomas's legal theories, but his interpretation is logically consistent and he sticks to it even to the point of frequently solo dissenting. It's important to read his stuff too because it seems to gain more acceptance as time goes on. Your points on Sotomayor are well taken, her dissents are often way over the top. However I'm starting to think Justice Jackson is potentially worse when it comes to histrionics
kenjackson 1y ago
You clearly hadn’t read Barrett’s majority opinion. Conceptually broken as anything I’ve read recently.
- threemux 1y ago
  Oh I read it, and I disagree with your analysis. Sotomayor makes some decent points in favor of nationwide injunctions when she deigns to engage in legal arguments, but the case against them is very compelling. The textual case is pretty much completely against them, and if you prefer a consequentialist analysis their drawbacks are well documented across the political spectrum. I will say Barrett's time as a professor can mean her opinions are highly technical in their procedural analysis and she's not as strong of a writer as other members of the court. This very opinion is also an example of something that Thomas has beat the drum about for some time and it later becomes a majority opinion.
  - kenjackson 1y ago
    I think your analysis is likely influenced by factors that are external to the actual opinion/dissent. But that’s fairly common.
    - threemux 1y ago
      Physician, heal thyself

mjburgess 1y ago

They're both excellent judges in non-ideological cases, and many of Sotomayor's majority judgements read well and she's clearly very on-the-ball in orals. It's a shame in these cases -- I think Sotomayor is more of an ideologue than Thomas.

threemux 1y ago
Yeah you can certainly criticize Thomas's legal theories, but his interpretation is logically consistent and he sticks to it even to the point of frequently solo dissenting. It's important to read his stuff too because it seems to gain more acceptance as time goes on. Your points on Sotomayor are well taken, her dissents are often way over the top. However I'm starting to think Justice Jackson is potentially worse when it comes to histrionics

kenjackson 1y ago

You clearly hadn’t read Barrett’s majority opinion. Conceptually broken as anything I’ve read recently.

threemux 1y ago
Oh I read it, and I disagree with your analysis. Sotomayor makes some decent points in favor of nationwide injunctions when she deigns to engage in legal arguments, but the case against them is very compelling. The textual case is pretty much completely against them, and if you prefer a consequentialist analysis their drawbacks are well documented across the political spectrum. I will say Barrett's time as a professor can mean her opinions are highly technical in their procedural analysis and she's not as strong of a writer as other members of the court. This very opinion is also an example of something that Thomas has beat the drum about for some time and it later becomes a majority opinion.
- kenjackson 1y ago
  I think your analysis is likely influenced by factors that are external to the actual opinion/dissent. But that’s fairly common.
  - threemux 1y ago
    Physician, heal thyself