Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
I might have mentioned that SCOTUS associates often have not conferenced according to press "branded" party affiliation. That is evident in diverse opinions (not ruling "scores") and dissenting rationales, if one reads them.

Here Windsor refers to US vs Windsor, which I have not read. The salient feature of the citation is not in the detail, but unexpected ahh controversy among the associates dissembling "party lines". Most recently, I encountered a memorable, LOL eruption by associates, attempting to communicate with Team Trump's counsel in Comcast. I doubt this incident will make it into yella sheets reporting or "analysis" of their decisions.
MR. ESTRADA: [...] that the facts especially with respect to mental state will always be in the possession of the defendant.
JUSTICE GORSUCH:  Well, Mr. Estrada, though --
JUSTICE GORSUCH: -- isn't it -- isn't it -- I'm --I'm sorry.
JUSTICE ALITO:  No, go ahead.
JUSTICE GORSUCH:  Isn't it perfectly common when -- when --when you're alleging a mental state of an opposing party and you have yet to have discovery to allege on information and belief mental states ...

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Nov 28th, 2019 at 07:26:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series