NY Times takes Dems in Disarray to court

[dpibel]

Today's NYT "The Morning" newsletter is all about a (self-described) scoop: The three liberal Supreme Court justices DON'T AGREE!! They are all angry with each other. Oh, and that new girl: She's totes out of line.

Supreme Court justices have a rule that they’re not supposed to insult their colleagues or the institution. It’s fine to express strong legal disagreement but nothing accusatory about other justices. Judges are supposed to be examples of stability, not figures who thwack each other over their disagreements. But that puts the liberal justices in a predicament: They’re outnumbered, three to six, and they are very worried about the court’s recent decisions. How can they vent their alarm?

Justice Kagan, appointed in 2010 to be a diplomat and strategist, is capable of punching hard, but she shows her frustration only in flashes. When the court rejected President Biden’s student loan cancellations in 2023, she deleted the most heated material from her dissent, I learned in my reporting. Justice Jackson aims directly at the right side of the court, accusing them of being clueless about racism, favoring “moneyed interests” and enabling “our collective demise.”
[snip]
The customary move would be for Jackson, the junior justice, to sign on and say no more. But sometimes she adds her own thoughts, going beyond the senior justice. “Eventually, executive power will become completely uncontainable, and our beloved constitutional Republic will be no more,” she wrote earlier this spring when the court limited the power of federal judges to curtail Trump’s power.

Sotomayor and Kagan worry that their newer colleague’s candor and propensity to add her own dissents have diluted the group’s impact.

As for the first of these paragraphs, apparently the ace reporter on this story has never read any dissents from Sam Alito or Nino Scalia. "Nothing accusatory about other justices" my ass.

As for the general characterization of Jackson, it seems she's...what's that word?...oh, yes: uppity.

[SocialDemocrat61]

1. Why are you surprised?

NYT has been right wing tabloid garage for years.

[dpibel]

4. Not sure why you think I'm surprised

I'm not seeing the surprise in what I wrote, but maybe I'm just not a good reader.

In any case, you may be surprised to know that there are people who post, voluminously, on this very website who will tell you all day long that the NYT is great journalism.

In any case, thanks to you, I now know that the NYT is where right wing tabloids park. Or get repaired. Not sure which meaning you intended.

[SocialDemocrat61]

6. I know

There are some corporate media cultists here who spend more of their time defending the Times, Washington Post, CNN and others, than they do supporting democrats

[Midnight Writer]

2. I'm sure that when the History of the Downfall of American Democracy is written

the 'incivility" of Justice Jackson will fill a whole chapter.

[erronis]

3. It'll probably be written by someone who appears frequently in the NYT and/or WaPo.

[Initech]

5. Why is it always the Democrats' fault?

The GOP are the ones who are drunk with power and out of control and they are the ones who are currently destroying the United States.