Home/Recent kwiples > Issues >

Supreme Court

Tuesday 31st of March 2026

Abortion For the Republicans,  the Supreme Court is all about abortions,  to which they remain staunchly opposed  right up to the moment their mistress gets pregnant. Bill Maher, Real Time With Bill Maher, July 6, 2018, alluding to Tim Murphy, the anti-abortion Republican congressman who was forced to resign in October, 2017, for asking his mistress to get an abortion after a pregnancy scare © 2018 Kwiple.com
Abortion I would like to see it done in the right way.. Ben Carson, who would like to make a public commitment to overturn Roe v. Wade , even in cases of incest or rape or when the mother's life or health is threatened, a prerequisite for being appointed to the Supreme Court © 2015 Kwiple.com
Affirmative action as expected, the court has inverted the 14th.  an amendment written explicitly to directly  ameliorate the conditions of race hierarchy becomes in conservative hands an amendment that says it’s illegal to try to directly ameliorate the conditions of race hierarchy Jamelle Bouie, 10:09 AM – Jun 29, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
Bullshitters say I onky ask for fairness, especially when it comes to decisions made by the United States Supreme Court! Donald Trump © 2020 Kwiple.com
Bullshitters say I will remember that it's my job to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch or bat.  John Roberts © 2021 Kwiple.com
Bullshitters say My personal views, I tell you, Mr. Chairman, are over here. I leave those at home. Neil Gorsuch, during his confirmation hearing for appointment to the Supreme Court, claiming to be tabula rasa when he decides court cases, which explains why Republicans stole a seat on the Court to ensure he'll sit in it and vote reliably Republican for decades to come  © 2017 Kwiple.com
Bullshitters say We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. John Roberts, criticizing Trump for calling a federal judge who ruled against his administration an “Obama judge” and ignoring decades during which courts at every level were packed with members of the right-wing Federalist Society, including Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch,, Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas and himself  © 2018 Kwiple.com
By the numbers Oh … I'd … say … 9 point 142 or thereabouts, which we all know is nearly a full point lower than how you rate yours.  How Katanji Brown Jackson should have responded to Lindsey Graham, who asked her  during her confirmation hearing for appointment to the Supreme Court, “How would you rate your religious faith on a scale of 1 to 10?” © 2022 Kwiple.com
Christian nationalists say One side or the other is going to win. There can be a way of working, a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. They really can’t be compromised. So it’s not like you are going to split the difference. Samuel Alito, announcing that, despite his role as a sworn-to-be-impartial judge, he is uncompromisingly committed to ensuring that Supreme Court rulings push the nation in the direction of “godliness” as defined by the Catholic church and Christian nationalists © 2024 Kwiple.com
Christian nationalists say There’s no gate that has allowed more evil to enter our nation than that of the Supreme Court. Dutch Sheets, on the Court's 2015 ruling allowing same-sex marriage © 2024 Kwiple.com
Christian right Five years ago, many evangelical voters still felt distaste for Mr Trump's libertine personality. They quickly learned he was the kind of pugilist they wanted. The likely Supreme Court confirmation next week of Amy Coney Barrett, and that of Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch before her are testaments to that. America's Christian right has embraced its inner Vladimir Lenin – the end justifies the means. Edward Luce, Financial Times, October 15, 2020 © 2020 Kwiple.com
Christmas The Supreme Court has ruled that they cannot have a nativity scene in Washington, D.C. This wasn't for any religious reasons. They couldn't find three wise men and a virgin. Jay Leno © 2015 Kwiple.com
Dead-in-the-heads say His [Neil Gorsuch's] nomination carries with it a superlegitimacy. … The American people played very direct role in helping choose this nominee. Ted Cruz, who thinks superlegitimacy is conferred by refusing to consider Democratic nominees, and by electing a president who encourages mob violence against protesters at his rallies; who requested and received Russian help in influencing the outcome of the election; who lost the popular vote by millions; and who depends on anti-democratic institutions like lying, the Electoral College, the Senate, nepotism, voter suppression, gerrymandering and pandering to the rich © 2017 Kwiple.com
Death  The vanity and presumption of governing  beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies. Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations which are to follow. Thomas Paine, Rights of Man  © 2020 Kwiple.com
Democracy This is what the death of American democracy looks like. It's time to acknowledge that we no longer have a democracy, but a plutocracy: Government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich, brought to you by Citizens United and the Supreme Court. Stephen Wolf, “Just 158 families account for nearly half of all presidential campaign donations,” Daily Kos, October 12, 2015 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Early retirement offer We have a special offer for you tonight: We are prepared to offer you $1 million a year for the rest of your life, if you simply agree to leave the Supreme Court immediately and never come back. This is not a joke. If you watch our show, you know jokes aren’t really our thing. This is real. A million dollars a year — until you or I die. John Oliver's offer to Clarence Thomas,  Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, Feb. 18, 2024 [Thomas was given 30 days to respond.  Oliver also offered him a new $2.4 million Prevost  motor home to replace the one he bought in 1999 with a $267,000 loan from Anthony Welters, which was forgiven in 2008] © 2024 Kwiple.com
Gerrymandering But just because soemthing is unjust and incompatible with democratic principles and fiendishly effective, Justice Roberts writes [in Rucha v. Common Cause], doesn't mean it's within the purview of the court to find a constitutional violation. Gerrymandering stinks, but not so badly that the Constitution can smell it. Jordan Ellenberg, Shape © 2022 Kwiple.com
Hypocrisy Of course, Democrats are screaming now about Republican hypocrisy over Trump filling the Ginsburg seat in an election year. “They said one thing when it was Obama and now they're saying  the complete opposite. How can they sleep at night?” I'll tell you how. Like babies.  Because, like babies, they have no morals. Bill Maher, Real Time with Bill Maher, Sept. 25, 2020 © 2020 Kwiple.com
Hypocrisy There is a lot of hard-to-explain hypocrisy and rush taking place right now,  and my expeience around politics says that when you find hypocrisy in the daylight, look for power in the shadows. Sheldon Whitehouse, at confirmation hearing for Amy Coney Barrett © 2020 Kwiple.com
Gun control When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck, Sonja Sotomayer, dissent in Garland v. Cargill, in which the Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority ruled that bump-stock-enabled semiautomatic rifles can't be banned because, technically, they are not machine guns, which can, even though they can be fired at the same rate of speed as machine guns  © 2024 Kwiple.com
Judges As of April 1, a record 39 judges have been appointed to lifetime posts on the Supreme Court and the federal courts of appeals. Right-wing organizations like the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation have played an important role too, including spending millions of dollars promoting Trump's judicial nominations … These nominess have developed a clear pattern of protecting corporations, the wealthy and the powerful over all people. Elliot Mincberg, The Washington Spectator, May 3, 2019 © 2019 Kwiple.com
Kwiplers say Amend the Constitution so that, every other year, the two most senior justices of the Supreme Court are replaced by people who never served on it before © 2015 Kwiple.com
Minority rule Minority rule has, in turn, skewed the composition of the Supreme Court. Under Mr. Trump, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh became the first two Supreme Court justices in history to be appointed by a president who lost the popular vote and then be confirmed by senators who  represented less than half the electorate. Amy Coney Barrett is likely to become the third. Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, New York Times, October 23, 2020  © 2020 Kwiple.com
Mob violence If she [Hillary Clinton] gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people – maybe there is, I don't know. Donald Trump, suggesting gun rights supporters take matters into their own hands if Hillary Clinton is elected President and gets to choose Supreme Court judges © 2016 Kwiple.com
Money in politics Anonymity, donor anonymity, is essential [to big donors to the Republican Party]. Voters may hate big anonymous donors,  but big anonymous donors need anonymity. The term for this anonymous funding, now pouring by the billions into our politics, is dark money. This [operation to capture the Supreme Court] is a dark money operation. And if you are out to capture a court, you want to be sure the court will protect your dark money, your camouflage for all your covert operations. Sheldon Whitehouse, July 13, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Money in politics This effort to capture the Supreme Court — they're not kidding around. Spending $250 million in dark money [from 2014 to 2017] is a serious investment that demands a serious return. And guess what? Expert testimony before my Senate Court subcommitte has since raised that number to $400 million through 2018. Through all these allied and front groups — the keys on the dark money piano that the big money donors can play in chords and singly, as they wish — dark money donors can, from hiding, covertly channel tens if not hundreds of millios of dollars in anonymized money towards the scheme's court capture goal. Sheldon Whitehouse, August 5, 2021, on efforts by the Judicial Crisis Network to make the Supreme Court a tool for use by the right- wing anti-government mega donors it represents © 2021 Kwiple.com
Political inequality  Four of nine current Supreme Court justices — Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — were confirmed by a Senate majority that collectively won a minority of the popular vote in Senate elections and represented less than half of the American population. And three of them — Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett — were also nominated by a president who lost the popular vote. Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, Tyranny of the Minority  © 2023 Kwiple.com
Political inequality In the current Senate, Democratic senators represent more than  forty million more people than Republicans. And yet the Senate is evenly divided between the two parties. That means that Republicans are hugely favored to hold the Senate in future elections, regardless of whether the voters prefer Democratic control. And the GOP control of the Senate will give the Republicans the power to block any Democratic judicial nominations and the power to block legislation writing federal regulations into a statute. Ian Milhiser, The Agenda  [2021] © 2021 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The present Republican Senate majority, which fast-tracked a third Supreme Court Justice to confirmation at a time when 60m had already cast their vote, represents 15m fewer Americans than the Democratic senators on whom they impenitently imposed their will. Sooner or later, these institutional anomalies will be redefined as gross injustices. Simon Schama, Financial Times, October 30, 2020 © 2020 Kwiple.com
Presidential immunity from criminal prosecution I worry that, after today’s ruling, our Nation will reap  what this Court has sown. Katanji Brown Jackson, dissent, Trump v. United States © 2024 Kwiple.com
Presidential immunity from criminal prosecution The majority opinion in Trump v. United States, the most sweeping judicial reconstruction of the American presidency in history, secures the monumental historic disgrace of the John Roberts Court.  Sean Wilentz, New York Review of Books, August 15, 2024 © 2024 Kwiple.com
Presidential immunity from criminal prosecution The way we shield our liberties from the threat of a tyrant is to make men obey the law, not place them above it. We chain the power of those who hold office; we don’t unleash it for them to use at their discretion. We don't extend every privilege and immunity we can imagine: we deny them and demand responsibility. I have a feeling that Alito and his fellow travelers on the court would understand this simple point if the president in question were an opponent and not an ally. As it stands, at least a few justices on the Supreme Court would rather shatter a bedrock principle of American democracy than let Trump face the consequences of his own actions. Jamelle Bouie. New York Times, April 22, 2024 © 2024 Kwiple.com
Presidential immunity from criminal prosecution With its adoption of a paradigm that sometimes exempts the President from the dictates of the law (when the Court says so), this Court has effectively snatched from the Legislature the authority to bind the  President (or not) to Congress’s mandates, and it has also thereby substantially augmented the power of both the Office of the Presidency and itself. Katanji Brown Jackson, dissent, Trump v. United States © 2024 Kwiple.com
Regulations Requiring legislative authorization for regulation that address “major questions” is tantamount to shelving it. That means the US government’s ability to address novel policy issues has been badly hamstrung. Brooke Masters, Fianncial Times, July 6, 2022, on the anti-government Supreme Court's ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, which prioritized protecting fossil fuel companies' profits over protecting the planet from warming and which will undoubtedly be the basis for forthcoming rulings shielding all businesses from any regulation whatsoever © 2022 Kwiple.com
Regulations The statute, read as written, gives the Secretary broad authority to relieve a national emergency’s effect on borrowers’ ability to repay their student loans. The Secretary did no more than use that lawfully delegated authority. So the majority applies a rule specially crafted to kill significant regulatory action, by requiring Congress to delegate not just clearly but also microspecifically.  Elena Kagan, dissent in Biden v. Nebraska, et. al. © 2023 Kwiple.com
Republicans say So what if Donald Trump pays no federal taxes | thinks those who do are stupid | evaded the draft |  belittles POWs & go ld star parents | denies having supported the Ir aq war | calls Mexicans rapists | wants to build a wall, exclude Muslims | insults & lies incessan tly | interrupts critics to divert attention | perso nifies narcissism |  is an adulterer | stalks, grop es women  | can't tell banter from bragging abo ut sexual assault | delegitimizes government, li beral democracy, a free press | wants nuclear w eapons to spread, a trade war with China | prais es dictators | asked Russians to hack Americans | never apologized for birtherism | defrauded in vestors & students | called it “Two Corinthians” | increases disrespect for America abroad | brag s about making money by running for president? — — — — — — — He's for cutting taxes on the rich and packing the Court with right wingers  W H I C H   I S   A L L  T H A T  M A T T E R S © 2016 Kwiple.com
Republicans say So what if Donald Trump stiffs contractors who work for him |  uses only offshore manufacturers  |  hires undocumented immigrants  |  is a “business genius” who's had six bankruptcies and was bailed out by banks  | bans some news networks from his events | en courages libel suits against journalists | is only suddenly pro-life  | claims to read the Bible but can't name his favorite verse  |  is not an active member of any church | is among the least cha ritable billionaires ever  |  uses his foundation's money to buy things for himself and make polit ical contributions  |  is a fear mongerer | thinks saying things again and again makes them true | humiliates prominent Republicans  | is loweri ng support for us among groups our survival de pends upon | is killing our downballot chances? — — — — — — — He's for cutting taxes on the rich and packing the Court with right wingers  W H I C H   I S   A L L  T H A T  M A T T E R S © 2016 Kwiple.com
Republicans say The Supreme Court is ours. Period. End of discussion. © 2016 Kwiple.com
Republicans say Whatever the cost, however it's measured, TO THIS ABOVE ALL ELSE BE TRUE: control attorneys generals, control judgeships © 2015 Kwiple.com
Resisters say Kavanope  Placard, protest at Supreme Court building, September 27, 2018  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Separation of chruch and state All six of the current justices of the Supreme Court that ended Roe vs Wade  and permitted a high-school football coach to conduct public prayers after games had a Catholic education, and made decisions that were surely informed by the convictions of their faith. Simon Schama, Financial Times, August 19. 2022 © 2022 Kwiple.com
Separation of powers [T]he majority resorts, as is becoming the norm, to its so-called major-questions doctrine. And the majority again reveals that doctrine for what it is — a way for this Court to negate broad delegations Congress has approved, because they will have significant regulatory impacts. Thus the Court once again substitutes itself for Congress and the Executive Branch  — and the hundreds of millions of people they represent —  in making this Nation’s most important, as well as most contested, policy decisions.  Elena Kagan, dissent in Biden v. Nebraska, et. al. © 2023 Kwiple.com
Separation of powers Wielding its judicially manufactured heightened-specificity requirement, the Court refuses to acknowledge the plain words of the HEROES Act. It declines to respect Congress’s decision to give broad emergency powers to the Secretary. It strikes down his lawful use of that authority to provide student-loan assistance. It does not let the political system, with its mechanisms of account- ability, operate as normal. It makes itself the decisionmaker on, of all things, federal student-loan policy. And then, perchance, it wonders why it has only compounded the “sharp debates” in the country?  Elena Kagan, dissent in Biden v. Nebraska, et. al. © 2023 Kwiple.com
Sleepers at the wheel say Every Justice seeks to follow high ethical standards, and the Judicial Conference's Code of Conduct provides a current and uniform source of guidance designed with specific reference to the needs and obligations of the federal judiciary. John Roberts, albeit in 2011, about members of his Supreme Court © 2023 Kwiple.com
Sleepers at the wheel say I have complete confidence in the capability of my colleagues to determine when recusal is warranted. They are jurists of exceptional integrity and experience whose character and fitness have been examined through a rigorous appointment and confirmation process. I know that they each give careful consideration to any recusal questions that arise in the course of their judicial duties. John Roberts, albeit in 2011, about members of his Supreme Court © 2023 Kwiple.com
Sleepers at the wheel say The Supreme Court is not a political institution © 2016 Kwiple.com
Snapshot #SCOTUS sources say Cruz asked to sit w Scalia clerks @ funeral. They said no. Then GOP leadership said no bc he wasn't 1 of them either. Ted Cruz portrayed by @NinaTotenberg, February 24, 2016 © 2016 Kwiple.com
State of the union  Everybody knows the game's been rigged © 2015 Kwiple.com
State of the union Once again wealthy Americans and business interests have a great deal of political power. Once again the Senate is filled with multimillionaires; the Supreme Court is overturning popular legislation; and both major parties appear to be swayed by the wishes of the business and financial communities. Benjamin Page and Martin Gilens, Democracy in America? © 2019 Kwiple.com
State of the union The Supreme Court has weakened the conflict- of-interest laws we have on the books. Trump and his Republican wrecking crew are ripping out the floorboards under the government ethics porgram. His administration has taught us the difference between theory and application and shown us what immunity to accountability looks like. What good are laws if no one in power will enforce them? Before Trump, our nation was admired for its anticorruption mechanisms, and its ethics program was considered the gold standard. No more. Once a model for other nations, we are now an object lesson for them. Walter M. Schaub. Jr. New York Review of Books, Juky 2, 2020 © 2020 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court After today, no one will have to go back 50 years for the classic case of the Court manipulating standing doctrine, rather than obeying the edict to stay in its lane.  Elena Kagan, dissent in Biden v. Nebraska, et. al. © 2023 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Barack Obama, who won the popular vote by 9.5 million votes in 2008 and five million in 2012 and served eight years in office, was able to appoint only two Supreme Court justices. Donald, who lost  the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by almost three million votes and was in office only four years (and impeached twice), was able to appoint three. Mary Trump, The Reckoning  © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court But we cannot exceed the scope of our authority under the Constitution, and we cannot allow our decisions to be affected by any extraneous infuences such as concern about the public's reaction to our work. Samuel Alito, February 10, 2022, initial draft of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade , expessing the Court's conservative majority's let-me-kiss-your-ring subserviance to the religious conservatives who make up the base of the Republlican Party that got them appointed to the Court, and its go-fuck-yourself disdain for others, including the vast majority of Americans who don't want Roe v. Wade overturned  © 2022 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court [Clarence] Thomas should never have been on the court. Now that we know his wife was plotting the overthrow of the government, he should get off or be thrown off. You can't administer justice when your spouse is running around strategizing for a coup. Maureen Dowd, New York Times, March 26, 2022 © 2022 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Colleagues, this is a scheme akin in complexity and tradecraft to an intelligence agency covert operation, only this one is not being run by one country against another. This one is being run in and against our own country by a handful of creepy billionaires and their donations trying to impose their self-serving ideology on the rest of us through our least democratic branch, the branch that doesn't care if normal people hate this stuff because they're in robes for life. That's our federal courts, and particularly the Surpeme Court. And the big dark money donors have pretty well pulled it off, too, following Lewis Powell's admonition to use strength in organization and united action. Sheldon Whitehouse, August 5, 2021, on efforts by the Judicial Crisis Network to make the Supreme Court a tool for use by the right- wing anti-government mega donors it represents © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court  The Court can function as the last word because it has allies who want  it to have the last word. Richard M. Valelly, American Politics © 2018 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court The current court's concept of equal protection has essentially boiled down to supporting white plaintiffs who claim to have been disadvantaged by affirmative action. Eric Foner, “Partisanship Rules” (2001) © 2017 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court During the Trump administration, for instance, the justices issued 28 orders at the request of the administration that blocked adverse lower-court rulings while the government appealed. This had the effect of allowing the government to enforce policies that had been invalidated by every other court ruling on their legality. In contrast, the Supreme Court issued only four such orders during the 16 years spanning the presidencies of both George W. Bush and Barack Obama. The court is also using these orders far more often to directly block government policies at the outset of litigation, when lower courts have refused to do so. Washington Post, September 3, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court The effort to capture the Court has likely been the most effectual deployment of right-wing and corporate resources into our common American political life, and America is now a very different place as a result of it. Much of it, like the proverbial frog in the proverbial pot, we've even gotten used to and accept it now as normal, when it isn't. Sheldon Whitehouse, June 22, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court The FBI sacrificed her [Christine Blasey Ford] to the gale force political pressure applied by the [dark money] scheme [to capture the court] to get this well-auditioned nominee [Brett Kavanaugh] into place. And let's get real. You don't apply gale force political pressure for judges who are just going to call balls and strikes. $400 million, $400 million has been spent in dark money on this court capture scheme. For $400 million, you don't want balls and strikes; you want judges who will throw the game for you. You want what you paid for: a captured Court, and if you look at its track record, that's this Court. It's the Court that dark money built, and it's delivering. Sheldon Whitehouse, September 21, 2021, summarizing the history of the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Four of the five-justice conservative majority on the Supreme Court – Samuel Alito, Jr., Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and John Roberts – were appointed by George W. Bush and Donald Trump, presidents who lost the popular vote [As of May 13, 2019] © 2019 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court I am going to do everything I can do to make sure four years from now, we still got an opening on the Supreme Court. Richard Burr, October 30, 2016, Republican Senator from North Carolina © 2016 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up. John McCain, Republican Senator from Arizona © 2016 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court I would suggest a more realistic view: for much of its history the Supreme Court has been the most conservative branch of the US government, and its justices have been chiefly motivated by their personal ideologies, which, like all good lawyers, they camouflage as solid reasoning. … I think a more objective view is to recognize that the justices sought to impose their conservative views on the will of the majority by  concocting legal theories to fit the moment. Jed S. Rakoff, New York Review of Books, September 19, 2024 © 2024 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court  If you look at other western legal systems, there is no parallel to the bind  in which America finds itself. The closest analogy to a Supreme Court whose majority follow originalism — fidelity to the alleged wishes of long-deceased men — sits in Tehran. Iran's Council of Guardians is unelected, regulates women’s bodies, cannot be re- moved and is impervious to public opinion. They answer to a higher power. The more America's Supreme Court resembles a theocratic body, the more it imperils itself. Edward Luce, Financial Times, May 3, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court In recent years, the Court has had a lot more friends than it used to. Amici filed 781 briefs in the 2014 Supreme Court term, a more than 800% increase from the 1950s and a 95% increase from just 1995. In the 2010 term, 710 amici briefs were filed in 78 cases. By 2019, that number had swelled to 911 briefs in just 57 cases. … There is another odd feature to this uptick in amicus briefs. Most of the time, you file an amicus brief when the justices have taken a case and are poised to actually decide the outcome of that case — the so-called merit stage of the case, which makes sense because this is when the rulings actually become law. But these days, more and more amici arrive when the Court considers whether to take up a case, when the justices are deciding whether or not to grant certiorari. Sheldon Whitehouse, November 16, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court [I]n the recent view of a majority on the U.S. Supreme Court, democratic responsiveness need not mean responding to all citizens equally. It can mean responding unequally, giving special weight to people or corporations that spend large amounts of money. Benjamin Page and Martin Gilens, Democracy in America?  [2017] © 2019 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court [T]he instances in which conservative and  liberal Supreme Court justices diverge from their preferred methods of statuary inter- pretation to reach results more consistent with their ideological leanings are so numerous as to cast in doubt their claims of adherence to such methods [as texturalism or originalism]. … … a cynic might suggest that the Supreme Court are unanimous in viewing principles of statuary interpretation as matters of convenience. Jed S. Rakoff, New York Review of Books, September 19, 2024 © 2024 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court It took a lot to … to drive  the Court's  reputation to its historic low. … It took the marriage of a man who needed adulation as a shield against self-doubt and a woman who needed a guru to shield her from ambiguity. It entailed the tribal pride of a little girl in a patriotic sash and the agony of a little boy who just wanted to open a second fucking box of cereal. Kerry Howley, New York Magazine, June 19 — July 2, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Last night, the Court silently acquiesced in a State’s enactment of a law that flouts nearly 50 years of federal precedents. Today, the Court belatedly explains that it declined to grant relief because of procedural complexities of the State’s own invention. Because the Court’s failure to act rewards tactics designed to avoid judicial review and inflicts significant harm on the applicants and on women seeking abortions in Texas, I dissent. Sonia Sotomayor, September 1, 2021, on the decision by Justices Alito, Barrett, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Thomas to not enjoin an unconstitutional Texas law that banned abortions after six weeks of pregnancy and allowed Texas to evade judicial scrutiny by empowering bounty hunters to enforce it © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court [L]ess than half of Democrats (47%) would trust the Supreme Court to fairly determine the winner of a contested election, compared to two-thirds of Republicans (67%). World Justice Project report on U.S. Rule of Law Trends and the 2024 Election © 2024 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court [T]he main reason the Supreme Court has been for most of its history, the most conservative of the three branches is that conservatives have traditionally paid much more attenton than liberals to placing their allies on the Court,  because it is their best hope for preserving the values they seek to preserve against popular reforms. Jed S. Rakoff, New York Review of Books, September 19, 2024 © 2024 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Our Supreme Court is awash in dark money influence, with flotillas of dark money front groups, front groups that don't bother to offer value, that aren't even real in the sense that they have a real business or function, that exist merely to signal their donors' desired outcomes while hiding their donors' identities. It's an armada of fakery that the Court indulges. This fakery lets a small, wealthy donor elite manufacture sham allies to get themselves a bigger say at the Supreme Court than everyone else. They are out to get the Court to do stuff for them that Americans don't want and that Congress won't vote for. But, with a captured Court, they can get what they want, and they do. Sheldon Whitehouse, November 16, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court  The Republican justices on the Supreme Court just established a new constitutional right to donor se- crecy. And they did so for a group — Americans for Prosperity Foundation — flagrantly involved in right-wing political mischief and manipulation. Flagrantly involved. The Americans for Prosper- ity Foundation group's operating entity actually had even spent millions of dollars just last year to help get Justice Barrett confirmed.  They are so brazen about this they actually used  Americans for Prosperity Foundation as the named party, and not some benign entity they could have dredged up. Nope. They took the bet that  this precedent of a politically active manipulator being the named party would not phase the Re- publicans on the Court, and they would be able with that partisan majority to gain a legal foothold for their dark money. Sheldon Whitehouse, July 13, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court The result here is that the Court substitutes itself for Congress and the Executive Branch in making national policy about student-loan  forgiveness. Congress authorized the forgive- ness plan (among many other actions); the Secretary put it in place; and the President would have been accountable for its success or failure. But this Court today decides that  some 40 million Americans will not receive the benefits the plan provides, because (so says  the Court) that assistance is too "significan[t]." … the Court, by deciding this case, exercises authority it does not have. It violates the Constitution.  Elena Kagan, dissent in Biden v. Nebraska, et. al. © 2023 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Something is not right around the Court. And dark money has a lot to do with it. Special interests have a lot to do with it. Donors Trust and whoever's hiding behind Donors Trust has a lot to do with it. And the Bradley Foundation orchestrating its amici over at the Court has a lot to do with it. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, confirmation hearing for Amy Coney Barrett, October 13, 2020 [Donors Trust is an identity scrubber for rich conservatives] [The Bradley Foundation funds legal cases and amicus briefs under dozens of names per case for conservative clients] © 2020 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court The Supreme Court is still great. It’s the greatest gathering of grievances we’ve ever seen on the high court. The woe-is-me bloc of conservative male justices is obsessed with who has wronged them. It might be an opportune time to hire a Supreme shrink so these resentful men can get some much-needed therapy and stop working out their issues from the bench. Maureen Dowd, New York Times, May 6, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court A system of government that makes the people subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy. Antonin Scalia © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court There are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they? Republican Senator Roman Hruska defending Nixon's nomination of G. Harrold Carswell for appointment to the Supreme Court © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court There is a pattern, a pattern of success when flotillas of dark money amici funded by a small number of wealthy right-wing donors show up, they win. The court that dark money built delivers in their favor. Exhibit A is probably the US Chamber of Commerce, where the idea for this scheme first bubbled up years ago with the Powell memo. Over the past 15 years or so, the Chamber has filed more amici briefs at the Supreme Court than almost anyone else, and it has gotten its preferred result more than 70% of the time. And no one knows what company or  what interest the Chamber may be fronting for. That is hidden from the Court and from the other parties. The Chamber can even hide if one of its members wrote or funded the Chamber's amicus brief in that member's own case. Sheldon Whitehouse, November 16, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court There is an important corollary to his [Justice William J. Brennan Jr.'s] famous Rule of Five, one powerfully at work in the current Supreme Court. That is the Rule of Six. A five-justice majority is inherently fragile. It necessitates compromise and discourages overreach. Five justices tend to proceed with baby steps. A six-justice majority is a different animal. A six-justice majority, such as the one now firmly in control, is the judicial equivalent of the monarchy’s “heir and a spare.” The pathways to victory are enlarged. The overall impact is far greater than the single-digit difference suggests. Ruth Marcus, Washington Post, Nov. 28, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court To state the obvious, judges do not know what scientists and public health experts do. So it is alarming that the Court second-guesses the judgments of expert officials, and displaces their conclusions with its own. In the worst public health crisis in a century, this foray into armchair epidemiology cannot end well. I fervently hope that the Court’s intervention will not worsen the Nation's COVID crisis. But if this decision causes suffering, we will not pay. Our marble halls are now closed to the public, and our life tenure forever insulates us from responsibility for our errors. That would seem good reason to avoid disrupting a State's pan- demic response. But the Court forges ahead regardless, insisting that science-based policy yield to judicial edict. Elena Kagan, dissent in South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom © 2022 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Today’s ruling illustrates just how far the Court’s “shadow-docket“ decisions may depart from the usual principles of appellate process. … the majority’s decision is emblematic of too much of this Court’s shadow docket decisionmaking — which every day becomes more unreasoned, inconsistent, and impossible to defend. Elena Kagan, September 1, 2021, on the decision by Justices Alito, Barrett, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Thomas to not enjoin an unconstitutional Texas law that banned abortions after six weeks of pregnancy and allowed Texas to evade judicial scrutiny by empowering bounty hunters to enforce it © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court [T]rust is built on consistent adherence to the rule of law. The recent, radical rulings by the Supreme Court, which itself reflects political polarisation, have made clear that the law won't be applied  in the same way everywhere. The legal framework that binds you will depend on who you are, and where you live. Rana Foroohar, Financial Times, July 10, 2022 © 2022 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Two recent Supreme Court rulings — one ending affirmative action in university admissions and another vetoing  Joe Biden's student debt forgiveness plan — have been lambasted by progressives as yet more evidence that the judicial branch is wrecking America. But there is a silver lining to almost everything, and I can see one here. The Supreme Court has unwittingly elevated the issue of income inequality, and the need for class-based educational reform in the US. Rana Foroohar, Financial Times, July 17, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court  We are now dealing with the Thomas court. Jill Abramson, Financial Times, July 9, 2022 © 2022 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court When big Republican donor interests come before the Court, they win. It looks like every time. I've show the pattern. I've published an article about it. It's currently at 80-0. Sheldon Whitehouse, October 27, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts? I don’t see how it is possible. Sonia Sotomajor, December 1, 2021, during oral arguments in the Mississippi abortion case, the latest in a series of cases conservatives on the Court are using to whittle away the right to an abortion © 2021 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court to 1%ers How do I love thee? Let me count the ways Elizabeth Barrett Browning, “Sonnet 43” © 2015 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court to Democrats Abandon all hope, ye who enter here Dante, The Inferno,  Canto III © 2018 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court to humanists, nonbelievers, secularists You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape the damnation of hell?  Matthew 23:33 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court to large corporations  Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you Matthew 7:7 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court to leftists, liberals, progressives Abandon all hope, ye who enter here Dante, The Inferno,  Canto III © 2018 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court to Republicans Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you Matthew 7:7 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court to the religious right  Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you Matthew 7:7 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Surely you jest Actual questions Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee asked Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch: Does a good judge decide who should win and then work backward to try to justify the outcome? — — — How in the world is Gorsuch able to go so many hours without peeing? — — — What is the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything? — — — What's the largest trout you've ever caught? — — — Would you rather fight a hundred duck-sized horses or one horse-sized duck? — — — Would you tell me where your favorite fishing stream is and don't say “Notellum Creek”? © 2017 Kwiple.com
Surely you jest The Supreme Court must never be viewed as a partisan institution. The justices on the Supreme Court do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle. Brett Kavanaugh --> © 2018 Kwiple.com
Trumpism An upside-down flag, adopted by Trump supporters contesting the Biden victory, flew over the justice’s front lawn as the Supreme Court was considering an election case. … Judicial experts said in interviews that  the flag was a clear violation of ethics rules, which seek to avoid even the appearance of bias, and could sow doubt about Justice Alito’s impartiality in cases related to the election and the Capitol riot. New York Times, May 16, 2024 © 2024 Kwiple.com
Trumpism  Last summer, two years after an upside-down American flag was flown outside the Virginia home of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., another provocative symbol was displayed at his vacation house in New Jersey, according to interviews and photographs. This time, it was the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, which, like the inverted U.S. flag, was carried by rioters at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. …  During the period the Appeal to Heaven flag was seen flying at the justice’s New Jersey house,  a key Jan. 6 case arrived at the Supreme Court, challenging whether those who stormed the Capitol could be prosecuted for obstruction. New York Times, May 22, 2024 © 2024 Kwiple.com
Trumpists say I have total confidence in Justice Thomas's impartiality in every aspect of the work of the Court. Each of the nine judges should feel free to make every single judicial decision they make with total independence and complete freedom, what cases they hear, how they hear them, how they rule,  whether and when they recuse themselves, and whether and when they retire. Mitch McConnell, opposing any ethics standards for Supreme Court justices, including ones preventing them from ruling in cases where they have conflicts of interest, like Thomas, who voted to prevent evidence of his wife's attempts to overturn the 2020 election to be turned over to Congress © 2022 Kwiple.com
Trumpists say No president has ever consulted more widely, or talked with more people from more backgrounds, to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination. Brett Kavanaugh's first public claim after Trump nominated him for appointment to the Supreme Court © 2018 Kwiple.com
Trumpists say One of my proudest moments was when I looked Barack Obama in the eye and I said, “Mr. President, you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy.” Mitch McConnell, bragging about preventing the Senate from considering Merrick Garland for appointment to the Supreme Court – perhaps the greatest Capitol offense in the nation's history for which the known perpetrator avoided appropriate punishment  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Trumpists say Our opponents of judicial nominees frequently claim the president has outsourced his selection of judges. I’ve been a member of the Federalist Society since law school — still am. So, frankly, it seems like it’s been insourced. Don McGahn, November 17, 2017, Trump's White House counsel, to a lawyers convention hosted by the Federalist Society © 2021 Kwiple.com
Trumpists say There’s a lot of developments yet to come, but I do believe the Supreme Court should step in, obviously, This is totally unprecedented. And it's dangerius to our system. … This is dimishing the American people's faith in our system of justice itself … I think that the justices on the court — I know many of them personally —  I think they’re deeply concerned about that  as we are. So I think they’ll set this straight, but it’s going to take awhile. Mike Johnson, to Fox & Friends, May 30, 2024, expecting Trump's Supreme Court to overturn a New York jury that unanimously convicted Trump of committing 34 felonies to win election © 2024 Kwiple.com
Trumpists say We will vote to confirm Justice Kennedy's successor this fall. It is imperative that the president's nominee be considered fairly and not be subjected to personal attacks. Mitch McConnell, June 27, 2018, Republican Senate Majority Leader who had prevented the Senate from even considering Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, trying to affect the 2018 midterm elections by guaranteeing appointment of whoever Trump would nominate at a later date © 2018 Kwiple.com
Voting rights Five unelected Supreme Court justices dis-  mantled an unmistakingly democratizing law,  the VRA [Voting Rights Act], which had been passed and renewed on muitiple occasions.  In 2019, when efforts to restore the VRA were blocked by a Republican Senate majority, that majority represented seven million fewer voters than the Senate Democratic minority that backed it. In January 2022,  when majorities in both houses of Congress  — and more than 60 percent of Americans — backed voting rights legislation, it was blocked by a minority in the Senate. Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, Tyranny of the Minority  © 2023 Kwiple.com
Voting rights The mere fact there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote. Samuel Alito, writing for the Supreme Court's Republicans — Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, John Roberts, and Clarence Thomas — a.k.a. “The Sellout Six” in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee © 2021 Kwiple.com
 
Wannabe autocrats say We got immunity at the Supreme Court. It’s so easy. I would fire him within two seconds. Donald Trump, responding to Hugh Hewitt, who asked, “You’re either going to have to pardon yourself or you’re have to fire Jack Smith [the special counsel investigating him]. Which one will you do?” © 2024 Kwiple.com