Alito Obliterates Jackson’s Dissent: ‘Groundless and Utterly Irresponsible’
Alito reminds Jackson that SCOTUS exists to interpret the law, not to be activists.
The Supreme Court issued an order to implement its 6-3 ruling that Louisiana’s redrawn congressional map violated the Constitution.
A SCOTUS judgment usually lands back at the lower court after 32 days. Bypassing the timeline means the lower court can enforce the redraw of the unconstitutional map.
Normally, this course of action would not be a big deal.
Except, this time, I guess Justice Samuel Alito finally had enough of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson due to her dissent against the order.
“The dissent in this suit levels charges that cannot go unanswered,” Alito started his concurring opinion, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.
I guess this means I have to read Jackson’s dissent, but you guys need context.
Jackson started her dissent by claiming, “The Court’s decision in these cases has spawned chaos in Louisiana.” She accused the majority of not just deciding the law, but now taking “steps to influence its implementation.”
By abandoning its usual practices and precedents, Jackson said the majority “unshackles itself from both constraints today and dives into the fray.”
Alito, along with Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Neil Gorsuch, has had enough of Jackson, describing her accusations as “trivial” and “baseless and insulting.”
Their concurring opinion is brilliant:
The dissent goes on to claim that our decision represents an unprincipled use of power. See post, at 4 (“And just like that, those principles give way to power”). That is a groundless and utterly irresponsible charge. What principle has the Court violated? The principle that Rule 45.3’s 32 day default period should never be shortened even when there is good reason to do so? The principle that we should never take any action that might unjustifiably be criticized as partisan?
The dissent accuses the Court of “unshackl[ing]” itself from “constraints.” Post, at 4. It is the dissent’s rhetoric that lacks restraint.
The justices calmly explained that SCOTUS can bypass Rule 45.3 when the appellees don’t express an interest in filing a petition for a rehearing.
Also, Louisiana needs a map now, especially since citizens can already participate in early voting in the primaries.
“The congressional districting map enacted by the legislature has been held to be unconstitutional, and the general election will be held in just six months,” added Alito.
You want chaos, Jackson? You would get chaos if a state proceeded with a map ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS:
The second reason offered by the dissent is that we should allow the 32 day period to run out in order to “avoid the appearance of partiality.” Post, at 3 (opinion of JACKSON, J.). But the dissent does not explain why its insistence on unthinking compliance with Rule 45.3’s default rule does not create the appearance of partiality (by running out the clock) on behalf of those who may find it politically advantageous to have the election occur under the unconstitutional map.
Mic drop. Boom.
Justice Jackson should remember this advice after reading Justice Alito’s response to her dissent:
“Never engage in a battle of wits with a Sicilian” https://t.co/s4QjDbv9Ql
— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) May 5, 2026
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I am a CPA with a specialization in federal taxation. Her concurrence in Moore v US (the Mandatory Repatriation Tax case) ie taxation of a foreign corporation’s income as if received by the US shareholder was deranged.
Its not surprising that she is writing deranged dissents.
I work indirectly with 3 former supreme court clerks. Each one of those three have commented on the frequency of citations in liberal justices opinions that misrepresent the holdings in those cited cases. By frequently, they implied that 3-4 times per term ( that would be out of 800+ citations during a term. = error rate of less than 1% which would be considered frequent at that professional level )
Jackson obliterated that rate. She misrepresented the holdings in 7-8 cases in a single concurrence.
Now figure out how many more katanji’s will be on the court if the dems gain power. They don’t want actual competent jurists, they want hacks like her to rule for the things they want. Regardless the Constitution.
Kagan writes like a law professor. I might disagree but see the point.
Sotomayor writes like a 1st year law student. Still figuring out how the law works.
Ketanji-Brown writes like a liberal arts major who thinks she is a lawyer.
It’s downright embarrassing to read.
To a battle of wits, KBJ comes unarmed.
Not being able to “define a woman” during her confirmation hearings showed the world her incompetence. Affirmative action never succeeds.
Not being able to “define a woman” during her confirmation hearing showed that the Senate should never have confirmed her nomination to put her on the highest court of the land. But refusing to confirm a black woman to the Supreme Court, no matter how incompetent, would have looked bad so they went ahead and did it. And the rest is DEI/Affirmative Action history,
>But refusing to confirm a black woman to the Supreme Court, no matter how incompetent, would have looked bad so they went ahead and did it.
The Senate should have said they were going to refuse to act on an explicitly racist nomination. Biden pledged that he was specifically only going to nominate a black woman; in any other hiring context, that would be outright illegal activity.
You say, “Affirmative action never succeeds.”
Really”
This person is today a USSC justice. And prior to that she was admitted to Harvard where she was given an undergraduate and a law degrees, the in time she was given a federal district court judgeship followed by an appellate judgeship.
Not one of those thing were ever earned by her by merit. She was given those things solely because of skin color.
What proof? Read her dissents.
“What proof? Read her dissents.:”
Read her concurring opinion in Moore – its delusional. Every tax attorney and CPA that works in the corporate tax arena thinks he concurrence was idiotic. Kavanaugh’s opinion was also deranged, but not nearly as deranged as KBJ’s concurrence.
She was perfectly capable of defining a woman, just like everyone else. She was just too dishonest to do so in public.
we’ll take our victories where and when we can get them
now if we can just get trump to
cross the delaware
the vra says no race discrimination allowed in redistricting
once again the argument acts as if ONLY BLKS were discriminated against
whts and others have and were also discriminated against
but b/c of the threat of violence and the need to keep the welfare state intact the view has always shut out that fact ( that non blks were also discriminated against) and we continue to be forced to play this game of
we are the only victims >>>poc
The statute also expressly says that it cannot be used to justify a proportional outcome of representatives. That was, of course, was exactly what the plaintiffs were looking to do.
Here, the court (Keagan) dragged this for seven months after the court voted the decision. And now the dissenters are pissy that they don’t get to drag this on an extra 32 days.
ok so now what happens when a state says they cant come to an agreement on the re districting to not be discriminatory and we are within weeks or days of voting time?
they will just hold the to the same illegal voting districts thereby by passing the scotus
and force djt to have to send in troops?
do an executive redistricting “emergency” ( newly minted law??) map?
I thought dumb DEI hires had others do their work. Why aren’t her clerks providing her with dignified dissents?
she also hired based on dei
Word is she INSISTS on writing her dissents herself. Her clerks are appalled and embarassed.
I
?
!
¡AI Ai AI AI AI!
No, it actually HASN’T caused chaos in Louisiana. The closed primaries did. I early voted this weekend with the wife and the only change was we couldn’t vote for District 1, because the other party didn’t qualify. So, if I voted for Scalise, it would not count.
The new district was absolutely laughable in its entirety. I’m glad we’re going to get rid of it.
Republicans Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins joined all Democrats in confirming Jackson to the Supreme Court.[1
True but ultimately probably immaterial to her confirmation. The vote was 53/47 in a 50/50 Senate and the VP would have cast the tie breaking vote… though that would have put the d/prog and Biden Admin in the unusual position of arguing for textulism. IMO it isn’t necessarily clear that the VP can cast a tie breaking vote outside of pure legislation and certainly not appointments b/c that puts the Executive Branch in position to interfere with the Senate ‘Advice and Consent’ role for nominations.
What that vote did do is reveal, yet again, that there’s establishment GoP figures who will buck the party consensus on big issues. IMO there’s two kinds. First is somewhat understandable; Senators in purple to blue States who really are representing the wishes of their State/Constituents, not great but at least understandable. Second category are spineless weasels too afraid of being called names by media, not being hugged by their d/prog buddies PR kicks off the DC cocktail party circuit like Romney and Murkowski. Not acceptable at all b/c they put themselves ahead of the wishes of their State and constituents.
I’m gonna be a tad Milthousian but by a close reading of the Constitution the VP is a member of the Senate as defined in Article 1, not the Executive branch which consists of the President and his appointments only as defined in Article 2. Though the office is filled in conjunction with the President the position by duty of presiding over the Senate mirrors the function of the Speaker of the House (also defined in the Constitution) and has no Executive authority unless elevated to the Presidency. The selection of the VP by the Electors reflects the original selection of the Senate by state legislatures. The concept of a VP as a kind of Co-President is a modern innovation. There were 18th and 19th century VPs who never set foot in DC IIRC
Sure and many agree with your position ….yet our Constitution requires nominations to gain the ‘Advice and Consent’ of the Senate. The VP, whatever ministerial function he exercises, is NOT a Senator and NOT a member of the Senate. Therefore, b/c a tie isn’t a majority IMO, he can’t break a tie about nominations precisely b/c the requirement of confirmation is gaining approval of the Senate ‘advice and consent’ via a Senate Majority, not a plus 1 from VP.
“The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.”
Doesn’t say anything about a vote for legislation.
A good Sicilian would force Jackson off the bench. Nonetheless, bravo Justice Alito.
I think even the other liberal Justices are getting tired of KBJ. I wonder if they are look for a no show professorship for her somewhere. Where she’ll get paid a lot more and have assistants do most of the teaching and “scholarship.”
There is a theory that KBJ is pushing the court to the right, as the other two don’t want to be associated with many of her views and opinions. In my select reading of cases, that seems to have a plausible basis.
unqualified / incompetent by any objective measure–if she possessed any sa / integrity she would resign forthwith–as she has neither will likely have to endure her bs for a long time–one of the leading poster children for the hypocrisy / spectacular failure of aa / dei policies (let alone the costs)
yet another ” fu ” to the republic from the fjb regime
But voted in by 3 republicans
When you’re dead, you don’t know you’re dead; Everyone else suffers.
It’s the same thing when you’re stupid.
This woman — yes, KBJ, a woman — has a lifetime tenure on the Court. Hopefully, wallowing on the dissenting ledger.
Well, maybe yes, maybe no.
How many times do you have to have your opinions shredded (in a targeted fashion) by your colleagues before you can be impeached for incompetence?
At least she doesn’t speak a lot more than other justices. Oh….wait. Nevermind.
Kentaji-Brown does the following:
1) Gross mistakes in the law. I don’t mean interpretations of the law, I mean saying the law says something it doesn’t. Adding in words that are not there.
2) Getting the facts of the case confused. Adding or subtracting facts as she pleases.
3) Accusing others of bad behavior. Attacking others for no reason.
Stolen elections have consequences – KBJ is but one result.
When she does leave, or is forced out, there is one thing I will bet good money on: the communists will say that her replacement has to be a black woman because that is “the black woman’s seat”.
When Thomas leaves, the communists will NOT say that his is “the seat reserved for a black man”.
To secure Jim Clyburn’s pivotal endorsement during the 2020 South Carolina Democrat primary, Biden agreed to appoint a black woman to the Supreme Court. In fulfilling his end of the bargain, Biden appointed an idiot, who is now derided by other members of the Court. How’s that Didn’t Earn It deal looking to you now, Jim? A bit Pyrrhic?
DEI embarrassment.
Leave a Comment