[Mr. Mojo]

Decision for liberty looks promising.

[ealgeone]

No. Kennedy seems to do this a lot and then rule with the libs on the court. I think he does this so the media will say he was "fair" and "open minded" when in reality he was against the right position all along.

If we can replace him and ginsberg under Trump, I'll be very, very happy.

[zeugma]

Decision for liberty looks promising.

Not really. You need to read all of the oral arguments to really get a feel for what was going on.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2017/16-111_f314.pdf

I think the baker is screwed. The biggest problem is that the court has, as is almost always the case these days, backed itself into a corner with the "public accomodations" rulings it has made in the past. Personally, I think what they really need to do is jettison that entire line of thought. It is not the government's business if someone doesn't want to sell to blacks, whites, or people with green eyes. The marketplace should be where all this stuff is hashed out, not under the heavy thumb of government sanction. Because of past rulings, the court is going to have a really tough time "drawing a line" that can be reasonably followed by lower courts. That was really clear by the initial round of questioning.