exist Moyle v United StatesJustices Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch will uphold the stay. In fact, they said they would rule for Idaho on the merits. But they disagree. Sometimes it’s a grumpy dissent. (Justice Gorsuch did not join the third part of the dissent, and he did not explain why.)
Judge Alito revealed what was going on behind the scenes and recommended granting a stay in January based on “the likelihood of success on the merits.”
Recognize the shortcomings of government theory and practice Idaho’s chances of success ‘high’the court stayed the preliminary injunction on January 5, pending appeal. exception Steps in granting certiorari before hearing an Idaho appeal before the Ninth Circuit. Please see Rule 11 of this Court.
The court did not provide any reasons for the order granting the stay. Here, Alito at least made clear what was important to the three dissenters, but I suspect it was also what convinced Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett. After all, Kavanaugh agreed labrador retriever The main concern is the likelihood of success. Furthermore, Alito acknowledged that regardless of whether granting certiorari before sentencing was a good idea, unearthing the writ now would be a mistake.
Alito later repeated this:
Already taken Extraordinary In order to determine whether the government’s new interpretation of EMTALA is correct, we have steps to grant certiorari before judgment. No good reason to change course Now.
Why are courts digging it up? The court “has lost its will”. Or, more accurately, Judges Kavanaugh and Barrett “lost their will.”
Everything that has been said about the issue of statutory interpretation has probably been said many times. This issue is ripe for decision-making. Obviously, the court is just lost will The decision is easy but Emotional and highly political Questions raised by the case. This is regrettable.
Why do they lose their will? The advice here is because the case is “emotional” and “highly political.” Alito suggested that Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh changed their minds because abortion is an “emotional” topic and the case had become “politicized.” I learned a long time ago not to use the word “emotion” when describing anything a woman does. If Judge Alito used this phrase against Mrs. Alito, he would certainly need to ask heaven for help. But this barb turned into a draft opinion. (Perhaps the comments will be deleted eventually.)
Alito repeated this assertion at the end of his argument:
Today’s decision is puzzling. Before the Ninth Circuit hears an Idaho appeal, it takes the unusual step of granting certiorari, court decides Don’t want to solve it This is the case after all, so the appeal goes back to the Ninth Circuit, which must now decide what this court now has to do Duck.
Alito accused Barrett and Kavanaugh of ducking and hiding.
This isn’t the first time conservatives have used such language. Back in 2021, Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch wrote that Barrett and Kavanaugh lacked “fortitude.” I observed at the time:
In excessive force cases, the conservative trio wrote that the two newest justices “are unwilling to…[] In the religious freedom case, Thomas No. 3 accused Kavanaugh and Barrett of lacking the “fortitude” to overturn controversial precedents.
These attacks remind me of Justice Scalia’s attacks on Justice O’Connor webster v. reproductive health services (1989). They are counterproductive.
I think the conservatives on the court need some sort of reset or intervention. The next thirty years will be long.
