The SCOTUS census decision analyzed

Linda Greenhouse is a great American institution.

“It would take a heart of stone not to feel sorry for the administration’s lawyers, faced with defending the indefensible. …

“I have no proof that Chief Justice Roberts initially voted with the administration and talked himself out of that position sometime during the two months that elapsed between the April argument and the June decision. But I’ve been reading Supreme Court decisions for a very long time, and the opinions that provide the holding — the chief justice’s plus the partially concurring opinion of Justice Stephen Breyer for the court’s four liberals — have all the hallmarks of judicial tectonic plates that shifted late in the day to produce an outcome that none of the players anticipated at the start.”

The decision in the census case suggests President Trump can no longer take the court for granted.

One thought on “The SCOTUS census decision analyzed

  1. It does sound like Roberts would have allowed the citizenship question, but justices really, really hate being lied to, and it sounds like the relevant law allows SCOTUS to screw the agency for lying to them in that particular way.

    In re the Dreamers, I expect that the business communities are not looking forward to losing 700,000 workers, which is over 3 months of job creation. And they still seem to have power in the Republican Party generally, as the one thing the Senate has regularly stiffed Trump on is nominees to the Fed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.