# Supreme Court rules on abortion access and Trump tax returns next week **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [June 26, 2020, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-on-abortion-access-and-trump-tax-returns-next-week/913214 "2020-06-26T15:27:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2020, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-on-abortion-access-and-trump-tax-returns-next-week/913214/121 "2020-07-31T12:43:55Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > I was just reading that. If offers a very interesting behind-the-scenes look at the inner workings of the Court that don’t often get written about. Other than the usual attempts mind-reading… > > “In March, Kavanaugh faced a test of the tension between his conservative bona fides and the **apparent** efforts to revive his reputation among women.” I like Biskupic’s work, and she does a good job of discussing the inner workings of the court, given that she has to rely almost exclusively on anonymous inside sources, and has very few ways of determining, in cases where she gets contradictory information, whose account is accurate. But I thought the piece on Kavanaugh contained far too many speculations and assumptions, of the kind that you’ve quoted here. In another place, she writes: > [@](#): > > Having undergone that divisive battle, Kavanaugh, in his writing, **appears keenly aware** of tenuous public opinion of him and ready to adopt a posture of conciliation with his colleagues as he tries to influence deliberations on cases. I’ve read a bunch of Kavanaugh’s opinions and dissents from this term, and nothing in any of them suggested (to me, anyway) any particular or keen awareness of public opinion, or any desire to mollify it by moderating his jurisprudence. She goes on at length about him allegedly trying to please both sides and appear moderate, but unlike some of her other articles on the court, where she connects her claims to court informants, her discussion of Kavanaugh’s “apparent” thinking is almost all just pulled straight out of her ass. I have no particular love for Brett Kavanaugh, nor for his decisions, but I also don’t think that this is very good reporting. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2020, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-on-abortion-access-and-trump-tax-returns-next-week/913214/122 "2020-07-31T13:50:14Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > She goes on at length about him allegedly trying to please both sides and appear moderate, but unlike some of her other articles on the court, where she connects her claims to court informants, her discussion of Kavanaugh’s “apparent” thinking is almost all just pulled straight out of her ass. > > I have no particular love for Brett Kavanaugh, nor for his decisions, but I also don’t think that this is very good reporting. “Apparently”, “appears”, “seemingly”, and others, these words always suggest outright guessing to me. All I ask is that at least one concrete example be giving that shows what the writer is suggesting. More than one is always better. I understand that in articles like these that there is often going to be a certain amount of personal opinion seeping in. But I need evidence. I too am not a fan of most of Kavanaugh’s decisions. Quite often here on the Dope, I’ll write something that sounds like I am defending Trump or another conservative, when in fact I am usually trying to make a comment on the medias’ poor reporting. This is another one of those times. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2020, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-on-abortion-access-and-trump-tax-returns-next-week/913214/123 "2020-07-31T14:36:20Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > Glad you liked it, **FP**. Here’s an interesting article, part of the same CNN series this week as the Kavanaugh article, on the Chief Justice’s role these days: Enjoyed it as well. And it was not as opinion-oriented. I will say though, going back to what I said earlier about the Chief Justice essentially having no more power than the others, a few quotes stood out. > [@](#): > > He used the full power of his position as chief and his place at the ideological middle to shape decisions. > > Yet this session and his action on some of the Trump administration’s most visible policy moves will go a long way toward defining his legacy. What is this alleged “full power” that he seems to have, which the others don’t? As for his legacy, certainly each justice has his or her own after serving on the court. And I understand the shorthand of calling it the “Burger” court, or the “Rehnquist” court, but what about the " O’Connor" court, for example. As each vote counts the same, I think many justices don’t get the credit or discredit they deserve. This is not a vital point by any means, but I just remember Toobin enlightening me, so I brought it up. There was one “pulling-out-of-the-ass” statement, though. > [@](#): > > He had given the administration great leeway, beginning with his 2018 opinion, joined by fellow conservatives, upholding the Trump travel ban aimed at majority-Muslim countries. I don’t know how Biskupic determined that Roberts meant this decision to explicitly give Trump leeway. But maybe I’m misreading this. Perhaps she simply means leeway resulted from the decision… ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2020, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-on-abortion-access-and-trump-tax-returns-next-week/913214/124 "2020-07-31T14:44:04Z")
As to naming particular Courts, a strong argument could be made for a “Kennedy Court” when the Reagan appointee was the key swing vote. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2020, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-on-abortion-access-and-trump-tax-returns-next-week/913214/125 "2020-07-31T15:00:57Z")
Well, yes, kind of my point. If it were generally called that, Kennedy could be given more credit (or not), depending on your outlook. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/supreme-court-rules-on-abortion-access-and-trump-tax-returns-next-week/913214.md?page=6)