Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Justices Kagan and Roberts Characterize Justice Sotomayor’s Dissent
Josh Blackman ^ | Josh Blackman

Posted on 06/11/2014 4:03:09 AM PDT by Perdogg

In Scialabba v. Cuellar de Osorio, both Justices Kagan and, to a lesser extent, CJ Roberts use some pretty strong language to characterize Justice Sotomayor’s dissent.

From Kagan’s opinion: •The dissent responds to this fact only with a pair of non-sequiturs. Post, at 18–19 (opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J.). •but cf. post, at 14 (SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting) (wrongly stating that under that rule conversion occurs upon the agency’s re- ceipt of proof of the change). •It is, therefore, impossible to understand the dissent’s statement that conversion of such a petition to an appropriate category requires “ ‘substantive alteration’ to [the] petition.” See post, at 19, n. 8 (opinion of SOTOMAYOR, J.).

(Excerpt) Read more at joshblackman.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bushfault; kagan; laraza; latinas; openborders; scotus; sotomayor; unwise; wiseandunwisealike

1 posted on 06/11/2014 4:03:09 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

ping


2 posted on 06/11/2014 4:03:33 AM PDT by Perdogg (Ted Cruz-Rand Paul 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Scialabba v. Cuellar de Osorio would be about...?

Started to read the link but eyes glazed over FRiend, can you transcribe into a sentence or two? Thanks!


3 posted on 06/11/2014 4:05:37 AM PDT by icwhatudo (Low taxes and less spending in Sodom and Gomorrah is not my idea of a conservative victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: icwhatudo

“In the case of Scialabba v. Cuellar de Osorio, a plurality of the Court held that children of immigrants who are waiting with their parents for a visa have to go to the back of the line once they reach the age of 21. “

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/opinion/2014/06/10/opinion-on-legal-immigration-supreme-court-gets-it-wrong/


4 posted on 06/11/2014 4:07:27 AM PDT by Perdogg (Ted Cruz-Rand Paul 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Ping


5 posted on 06/11/2014 4:12:20 AM PDT by PubliusMM (RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2016; I pray we make it that long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Does our “Wise Latina” twist precedent in favor of ‘wise latinas?’


6 posted on 06/11/2014 4:21:28 AM PDT by Prospero (Si Deus trucido mihi, ego etiam fides Deus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prospero
Does our “Wise Latina” twist precedent in favor of ‘wise latinas?’

Not just wise Latinas, but any and all Latinas (and Latinos).

She views her judgeship as an advocacy.

7 posted on 06/11/2014 4:31:27 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: Ignorance on parade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Why not just redirect the bus routes back to the “once upon a time” border? Sure would solve a lot of problems if we dumped them back into Mexico, at least for a while until the came across again.


8 posted on 06/11/2014 4:35:20 AM PDT by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Nothing more creepy than watching SCT justices and so called academics insulting each other

look y’all, you personally DON’T MATTER

the ideas and principle you are supposed to be applying matter


9 posted on 06/11/2014 4:43:36 AM PDT by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveA37

But this ruling is for LEGAL immigrants waiting for visas for years. The court just ruled that it is rather foolish to do things the legal way and wait your turn - just cross where you can illegally. You will not be sent back and at least you are in the US like you have aspired to be legally for years. (It didn’t say that last part but that is the common sense approach that this ruling reinforced.)


10 posted on 06/11/2014 4:44:44 AM PDT by Abby4116
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DaveA37

These people were from El Salvador and it was a case of legal immigration. Legal immigration shouldn’t be a byzantine system.


11 posted on 06/11/2014 4:50:42 AM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Not just wise Latinas, but any and all Latinas (and Latinos).

Class and economics have evaporated as causes of war.

The 21st Century will be the century of the blood. The Wise Latina obviously knows this.

Do you?

12 posted on 06/11/2014 4:54:14 AM PDT by Jim Noble (When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
The 21st Century will be the century of the blood. The Wise Latina obviously knows this.

In a multi-ethnic environment, the minority ethnicities tend to vote as tribes. The majority ethnicity, if there is one, tends not to vote as a tribe.

However, once a majority ethnicity slips into minority status, it too will start to respond as a tribe.

And that is the situation we're approaching, isn't it?

13 posted on 06/11/2014 5:14:07 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: Ignorance on parade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Is that allowed in Obamastan?


14 posted on 06/11/2014 6:23:07 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

IOW even the USSC KNOWS Sotomayor is unqualified.


15 posted on 06/11/2014 6:34:27 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01
In a multi-ethnic environment, the minority ethnicities tend to vote as tribes. The majority ethnicity, if there is one, tends not to vote as a tribe.

Were on the planet is this true, except in Western European and Western European settler states?

16 posted on 06/11/2014 7:02:02 AM PDT by Jim Noble (When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; GregNH; Salvation; ...

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

17 posted on 06/11/2014 9:12:19 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Prospero

The lineup of Justices in this case was rather unusual. The lead opinion (in favor of the Immigration Bureau and against the immigrants) was written by Kagan and joined by Kennedy and Ginsburg (only). Chief Justice Roberts, in an opinion joined only by Scalia, reached the same result for a different reason. Sotomayor dissented (in favor of the immigrants) in an opinion joined only by Breyer and Thomas. Alito also dissented, in a separate opinion joined by nobody else. So the 5-4 decision is actually 3-2-3-1, and you had “liberal” and “conservative” justices on both sides (Kagan, Ginsburg and Scalia for the immigrants; Sotomayor, Breyer, Thomas and Alito against).


18 posted on 06/11/2014 9:48:49 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
Oops-- had that last part backwards: Kagan, Ginsburg and Scalia against the immigrants; Sotomayor, Breyer, Thomas and Alito for them.
19 posted on 06/11/2014 9:52:42 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Thank you. That is the information I was looking for. It makes it even more devastating to the “WISE LATINA” to be so criticized by Kagan, while Scalia is with her on the law.


20 posted on 06/11/2014 10:24:30 AM PDT by az wildkitten (8 years 'til I retire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: az wildkitten; BuckeyeTexan
It makes it even more devastating to the “WISE LATINA” to be so criticized by Kagan, while Scalia is with her on the law.

Scalia agreed with Kagan as to the result, but not her reasoning. On the other hand, Thomas joined Sotomayor's opinion. Buckeye Texan described this opinion as "cats and dogs living together."

21 posted on 06/11/2014 10:31:49 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian; az wildkitten

Cats and dogs indeed. Round and round they go, where they’ll stop nobody knows.


22 posted on 06/11/2014 10:50:46 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Really? The two appointees of the Clown are in sharp disagreement?? I am stuned.


23 posted on 06/11/2014 12:01:01 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Rather unusual? Man, that is the weirdest lineup to say the least.

Sotomayor and Thomas on the same side??? Hmmm.

And a rare moment when Scalia and Thomas reach a different conclusion.

Wow.


24 posted on 06/11/2014 12:06:47 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Durus
“Legal immigration shouldn’t be a byzantine system.”

Just like healthcare where it “used to be” difficult and “expensive”. And “everyone” agreed that it could be done better and nobody should be excluded under a system that was so complex and difficult to navigate.

So - free immigration for everyone!

25 posted on 06/11/2014 12:14:14 PM PDT by 21twelve (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2185147/posts 2013 is 1933 REBORN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

That is what I had hoped I expressed, but I guess not.


26 posted on 06/11/2014 12:59:26 PM PDT by az wildkitten (8 years 'til I retire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: okie01

What a shock this crypto-lesbo latina smurf doll would vote for her “la raza”. And this is the only time she has been called “doll” in her life


27 posted on 06/11/2014 1:05:11 PM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

As confusing as “who’s on first ...”


28 posted on 06/11/2014 4:00:09 PM PDT by hoosiermama (Obama: "Born in Kenya" Lying now or then or now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 21twelve

That’s among the most ridiculous straw-man arguments I’ve ever read on FR. Congratulations or my condolences, whichever you prefer.


29 posted on 06/11/2014 4:31:52 PM PDT by Durus (You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson