Often In Dissent, Sometimes Alone, Jackson Lays Out Progressive Vision For The Court

Originally published at: Often In Dissent, Sometimes Alone, Jackson Lays Out Progressive Vision For The Court

As they reshape American life, the conservative Supreme Court justices are working to realize the vision developed by the right-wing legal world they came from: weak regulatory agencies, an omnipotent executive, a flexible enough rule of law to imbue the courts (particularly theirs) with awesome power. They employ (and create) a variety of tools to…

1 Like

13 appellate courts 13 supremes.

@txlawyer can tell why I’m wrong. And also raise the ante please.


KBJ will serve as an excellent cornerstone for building a new SCOTUS to replace the current corrupted version constructed by oligarchs and supported by a fascist cult. We definitely need to add more and younger justices with the integrity and constitutional knowledge that she unfailingly displays.

Well done article, Kate, and as a bonus the comments section was immediately available through the front door. Yay!


Reading Justice Jackson’s dissents is like breathing cool fresh air, both uplifting and brilliant at the same time.


Future Chief Justice material. How does “the Brown-Jackson court” sound?

Now how do we get there? Justice Dept. actually responding to the Senate’s referral of Thomas’s obvious tax evasion crimes would be a good start, especially now that SCOTUS has said that corruptly using the Justice Dept for political purposes is an A-OK unreviewable official act.


Stephanopoulos apologizes for saying Biden can’t serve another term (msn.com)
Driving the news: TMZ released a video Tuesday appearing to show a pedestrian on a New York City street asking Stephanopoulos, “Do you think Biden should step down?”

  • “I don’t think he can serve four more years,” Stephanopoulos responds.
  • The clip quickly gained traction on social media.

What they’re saying: “Earlier today I responded to a passerby. I shouldn’t have,” Stephanopoulos said in a statement Tuesday night response to the video’s release, ABC News reported.

  • In its own statement, ABC News said that Stephanopoulos had “expressed his own point of view and not the position of ABC News.”

Not like its hot there or anything
Over 1 million still without power in Houston (msn.com)


KBJ has a mind like a bear trap and is unafraid of voicing her informed view of the Constitution and justice. One can only respect her.


“”“It is a core tenet of our democracy that the People are the sovereign, and the Rule of Law is our first and final security,” she wrote.“”"

It’s important to keep the focus and the talk on that. “losing our democracy” or “destroying our democracy” is hyperbolic and so out there it’s not likely to be taken seriously by many. I don’t.

The threat from Trump, the GOP and 2025 is the loss of liberal democracy and replacing it with illiberal democracy. That’s what went down in Hungary and Poland. Those countries still have a democracy but no real Rule of Law and the people are not sovereign. That’s what Trump and the boyz want.


Biden should just attack the “liberal media” as Clinton once did. It confounded everyone but seemed to work.


It wasn’t just a passing statement as George would have us believe. It was a Freudian slip and reveals exactly why no Democrat should EVER take a seat with this stuffed shirt.


He’s way too experienced to forget. He did it on purpose.


There are no real liberals on the SC. The conservative controlled democratic party will nominate zero liberals to the SC even when the conservative republicans allow them a pick. Both parties are controlled by the conservative ruling power elite and no liberals will ever be allowed to control policy or the levers of wealth and power in America.

1 Like

The problem with SCOTUS is not that it has 9 seats. The problem with SCOTUS is that it has a bunch of malignant fascist assholes in charge of it. Bribe them into retirement with the SCRAP Act.

If you’re really going to expand the Court, go way bigger than 13. 25 would be my preferred number. Eliminate discretionary review, make everything heard by random 3-justice panels, full court only for en banc rehearing. Essentially, a Super Court of Appeals.


The mere fact that the Amendment process was included in the Constitution gives a lie to the “originalist” argument. It sits on a very shaky foundation in the first place; if we ever get few more liberals on the Court, “originalism” may die the death it so richly deserves.


JFC George S., you’re a 'effing journalist. This 2024 and every single person has a camera. Hell even a lot houses have cameras with a recording devise.
Unless you’re in Houston, TX, the electricity is on and the batteries fully charged.


Ketanji Brown Jackson

Biden picked her?

That can’t possibly be. He walks funny.

“the People are the sovereign”

Say it. Teach it. It’s the essence of American exceptionalism.

“But, per Bruen , courts evaluating a Second Amendment challenge must consider history to the exclusion of all else.”

And there is the essence of conservatism. There is only one way, so exclude all individuality. A politician or fake tv star shall decide you, worker, don’t need water on a hot day.

Jackson wrote on a couple major cases where the other liberals kept silent.

Seriously, who really nominated her?

Excellent article, Kate


I object to this article by Kate in that she makes interpreting the law a political statement not a legal one. The use of the word progressive and liberal to define some on the court diminishes their reading of the law. Does one have be either of those things to see that the Court has gone off the rails?


a structure in which power pools in the least democratic corners of our governmental structure, insulated from popular will.

“Democracy in chains.”

This has been the Koch plan for decades.


Brilliant!  : - )