How scouts actually splits on issues.

[Bullseye]

There's been a lot of discussion recently because of the death of RBG. All the usual Cons v Libs jabberwocky pops up everywhere. But does the ideological split show up in the actual decision the court hands down?
Turns out that the lefties tend to vote as a group more often than the righties.

There were 67 decisions after argument in the term that ended in June. In those cases, the four justices appointed by Democratic presidents voted the same way 51 times, while the five Republican appointees held tight 37 times. And of the 20 cases where the court split 5-4, only seven had the “expected” ideological divide of conservatives over liberals. By the end of the term, each conservative justice had joined the liberals as the deciding vote at least once.

Interesting info.

And yes, I realize I types "scouts" instead of "SCOTUS"/

 

[Casper]

There's been a lot of discussion recently because of the death of RBG. All the usual Cons v Libs jabberwocky pops up everywhere. But does the ideological split show up in the actual decision the court hands down?
Turns out that the lefties tend to vote as a group more often than the righties.


Interesting info.

And yes, I realize I types "scouts" instead of "SCOTUS"/

Glad you explained that last part, good grief we are now going after the Scouts, haven't they dealt with enough.... the courts are not supposed to be political, so hence they will have a tendency to rule per their interpolation of the Constitution meaning they will not always just go with what is expected. More right leaners going left on a case means the left was right all along. Didn't think of that did ya.....

 

[Bullseye]

Glad you explained that last part, good grief we are now going after the Scouts, haven't they dealt with enough.... the courts are not supposed to be political, so hence they will have a tendency to rule per their interpolation of the Constitution meaning they will not always just go with what is expected. More right leaners going left on a case means the left was right all along. Didn't think of that did ya.....

Nope. It means the righties actual consider that facts and the law and decide from that. All depends on the actual issue as well; not every case is easily classified as "right or "left"

Nice try.

 

[Casper]

Nope. It means the righties actual consider that facts and the law and decide from that. Nice try.

So long as it serves their purpose, otherwise, not so much.

 

[Bullseye]

So long as it serves their purpose, otherwise, not so much.

Their purpose is to interpret the law in accordance with the Constitution.

 

[Casper]

Their purpose is to interpret the law in accordance with the Constitution.

The SC, yes, Politicians not so much

 

[Bullseye]

The SC, yes, Politicians not so much

be safe.

 

[naturebow63011]

It just seems so hypocritical. You know one party wouldn't even consider a nominee at the beginning of an election year of a previous president, because they said it was an election year. Then a few years later with less than two months before an election with their candidate in the office of the presidency that same party wants to proceed with a nomination. Certainly it is legal, but hypocritical.

 

[d0gbreath]

There haven't been activist judges on the supreme court since the Dred Scott decision.