Thread by @LemieuxLGM

Rare winter quarter case of a major constitutional ruling coming down while I'm teaching con law

One the one hand, the no justice is willing to put their name on the lawless majority opinion, Bush v. Gore style; OTOH the dissenters issue a rare jointly signed opinion

This is simply the meat of the case. The OHSA did exactly what Congress empowered it to do in very clear and explicit terms. That should be the end of this case.

If you're going to issue an opinion that will result in 6500 people dying and 250,000 people going to the hospital, your legal case had better be overwhelming. The Republican majority's is in fact the opposite of that.

It should of course go without saying that the opinion does not meet the standards that apply to granting stays, standards the Court's Republicans have been simply ignoring for years

"OSHA’s rule perfectly fits the language of the applicable statutory provision"

The majority's reasoning for why the plain, explicit language of the statute should not apply is barely different than the reasoning used by the "how can we stop COVID when we can't see it" guy in Wisconsin

The Republican majority's ruling is not consistent with the explicit text, structure, or purpose of the statute. It is simply overriding the will of Congress and the duly elected president because it doesn't like the policy chosen. That's it.

👇

"Today, we are not wise." The Roberts Court has done many disgraceful things and will do many, many more, but this will rank toward the top. Just pure lawless Guided Age Redux bullshit. Ignoring the plain text of the relevant statute to impose a horrible policy choice.

The same premise as Gorsuch's idiotic question about why the OHSA didn't require the polio vaccine! To state this argument is to refute it, and yet it's pretty much the entire basis for the Republican majority's conclusion