[EL] Are SCOTUS Liberals Savvy or Suckers?

[Rick Hasen]

    "Are the Liberal Justices Savvy or Suckers? They are playing to beat
    John Roberts at his long game." <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52502>

Posted on July 1, 2013 11:37 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=52502> by 
Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I've just written this jurisprudence essay 
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/07/are_the_liberals_on_the_supreme_court_savvy_or_suckers.html>for 
/Slate/.  It begins:

    At first glance, the 7--1 vote in the /Fisher/ affirmative action
    <http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-345_l5gm.pdf> case
    decided by the Supreme Court is puzzling. While the decision about
    the University of Texas' admissions policies was essentially a punt,
    putting off for another day the future constitutionality of
    affirmative action programs, two of the court's liberals (Justice
    Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Stephen Breyer) joined in an opinion
    that seemed to impose a very tough hurdle for any program's
    constitutionality in the future. (Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
    dissented, and Justice Elena Kagan recused herself). The ruling
    followed a voting decision
    <http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf> the week
    before, when all four of the court's liberals signed on to Justice
    Scalia's entire opinion in an Arizona voting case, which plants the
    seeds for new state attacks
    <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/17/the-supreme-court-gives-states-new-weapons-in-the-voting-wars.html>
    on federal voting laws. And in 2009, all four liberals signed onto
    an opinion <http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-322.ZS.html>
    calling into question the constitutionality of the Voting Rights
    Act, an opinion that Chief Justice John Roberts relied on heavily in
    his new /Shelby County /decision
    <http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf> striking
    down part of the act.

    What gives? Are the liberal justices acting as suckers for going
    along with these opinions, allowing conservatives the time bombs
    <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1750398> to go
    off
    <http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/06/the-curious-disappearance-of-boerne-and-the-future-jurisprudence-of-voting-rights-and-race/>
    in future cases? If, as Adam Liptak
    <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/us/politics/roberts-plays-a-long-game.html?pagewanted=all>,
    Emily Bazelon, andI
    <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/opinion/the-chief-justices-long-game.html?hp>
    have argued, Roberts is playing a long game to move the court far to
    the right over time, why are the liberals playing along?

Share 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D52502&title=%E2%80%9CAre%20the%20Liberal%20Justices%20Savvy%20or%20Suckers%3F%20They%20are%20playing%20to%20beat%20John%20Roberts%20at%20his%20long%20game.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Supreme Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting 
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15> | Comments Off |

-- 
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu
http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130701/883afc97/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130701/883afc97/attachment.png>