I think the very high level of political controversy in the first 5 months of Trump's 2nd term made the Supreme Court seem less controversial. And the controversial Supreme Court affirmative action decision in the prior year now seems mild compared to the all-out assault on DEI by the Trump Administration. So having a very assertive and polarizing President has somewhat dimmed controversy over Supreme Court decisions this year.
I think you're absolutely right. Trump critics might say that fretting over SCOTUS is like worrying about the crack in your car's windshield when the whole thing is on the brink of breaking down....
Regarding point 8, I would agree that the *merits* docket was more chill than in recent years, but that's in some ways just a distraction from the bitter chaos the Trump administration introduced to the emergency docket.
Very, very true. One thing Zach and I have been discussing is how SCOTUSblog can also track the (increasingly important) goings-on over on the emergency docket.
I proposed doing a Stat Pack for the short-order docket, for the calendar year rather than the Term (since developments on that docket happen year-round; it will be interesting to see how much the justices are willing to do over the summer).
Chaos by Trump administration? You mean the executive branch wanting to be able to do its job without imperially minded, unelected judges issuing national-wide injunctions they aren’t untitled to?
I'm not a lawyer but to my eyes, I see the legislative branch and now the judicial branch of government abrogating their responsibility to the constitution to the executive branch.
1. I totally agree with you as to the legislative branch. As they love to say over at Advisory Opinions, "Congress, do your job."
2. As to the judicial branch, I think you will appreciate my next podcast interview, with a guest who argues that while the lower courts are doing their job, the Supreme Court is... falling short (she phrases it more strongly on the episode).
To point 8, I wonder whether Sotomayor's increasing use of snarkier ways of saying "I dissent," rather than "I respectfully dissent" is significant -- it could be nothing (just a quirk of hers, say), or it could indicate a breakdown of collegiality or "chill" in the court as a whole...
It happens a handful of times each Term. I'm guessing that if you look at the cases from past Terms that are listed at the end of point #8, the dissents in them are similarly missing the "respectfully."
On point 5 and 6, I'm interested in what reversals as a percentage of total cases would look like for each circuit. By the time it gets to the Court at least 4 justices think it's worth taking a closer look, so the percentages from the stat pack can't be truly representative, especially since some circuits will naturally get higher profile/more controversial cases because of forum shopping.
You might be interested in this article by Professor Brian Fitzpatrick (a past podcast guest of mine). He argues that "to assess a circuit’s reversal rate, we must control for the number of appeals a circuit decides. The Fifth Circuit decides a lot of appeals. Once we control for that, its reversal rate was decidedly middling."
I largely agree. That said, I was very surprised at the sniping between KBJ and ACB in CASA. We've seen those kind of exchanges from Justices before, but not really from those two. I wonder if it will be the start of a simmering rivalry between the two.
I am curious if the comment about Justice Jackson — "how shallow KBJ's thinking is — is a reference to her dissent in CASA, or a more general comment. And my apologies, I am sure if I were a regular reader I would know the answer, but I just stumbled on this by happenstance today.
I think the very high level of political controversy in the first 5 months of Trump's 2nd term made the Supreme Court seem less controversial. And the controversial Supreme Court affirmative action decision in the prior year now seems mild compared to the all-out assault on DEI by the Trump Administration. So having a very assertive and polarizing President has somewhat dimmed controversy over Supreme Court decisions this year.
I think you're absolutely right. Trump critics might say that fretting over SCOTUS is like worrying about the crack in your car's windshield when the whole thing is on the brink of breaking down....
Regarding point 8, I would agree that the *merits* docket was more chill than in recent years, but that's in some ways just a distraction from the bitter chaos the Trump administration introduced to the emergency docket.
Very, very true. One thing Zach and I have been discussing is how SCOTUSblog can also track the (increasingly important) goings-on over on the emergency docket.
I proposed doing a Stat Pack for the short-order docket, for the calendar year rather than the Term (since developments on that docket happen year-round; it will be interesting to see how much the justices are willing to do over the summer).
Stop trying to make “short-order docket” happen, David. It’s not going to happen.
Chaos by Trump administration? You mean the executive branch wanting to be able to do its job without imperially minded, unelected judges issuing national-wide injunctions they aren’t untitled to?
I'm not a lawyer but to my eyes, I see the legislative branch and now the judicial branch of government abrogating their responsibility to the constitution to the executive branch.
1. I totally agree with you as to the legislative branch. As they love to say over at Advisory Opinions, "Congress, do your job."
2. As to the judicial branch, I think you will appreciate my next podcast interview, with a guest who argues that while the lower courts are doing their job, the Supreme Court is... falling short (she phrases it more strongly on the episode).
To point 8, I wonder whether Sotomayor's increasing use of snarkier ways of saying "I dissent," rather than "I respectfully dissent" is significant -- it could be nothing (just a quirk of hers, say), or it could indicate a breakdown of collegiality or "chill" in the court as a whole...
It happens a handful of times each Term. I'm guessing that if you look at the cases from past Terms that are listed at the end of point #8, the dissents in them are similarly missing the "respectfully."
Thank you for clarifying! I was under the impression that this was a newer development.
On point 5 and 6, I'm interested in what reversals as a percentage of total cases would look like for each circuit. By the time it gets to the Court at least 4 justices think it's worth taking a closer look, so the percentages from the stat pack can't be truly representative, especially since some circuits will naturally get higher profile/more controversial cases because of forum shopping.
You might be interested in this article by Professor Brian Fitzpatrick (a past podcast guest of mine). He argues that "to assess a circuit’s reversal rate, we must control for the number of appeals a circuit decides. The Fifth Circuit decides a lot of appeals. Once we control for that, its reversal rate was decidedly middling."
https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-the-fifth-circuit-too-conservative
https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2024/08/15/is-the-5th-circuit-really-too-conservative-for-the-supreme-court/
I largely agree. That said, I was very surprised at the sniping between KBJ and ACB in CASA. We've seen those kind of exchanges from Justices before, but not really from those two. I wonder if it will be the start of a simmering rivalry between the two.
Sniping? It was a full takedown of KBJ by ACB. This judgment also exposed how shallow KBJ’s thinking is.
I am curious if the comment about Justice Jackson — "how shallow KBJ's thinking is — is a reference to her dissent in CASA, or a more general comment. And my apologies, I am sure if I were a regular reader I would know the answer, but I just stumbled on this by happenstance today.