Justice Sotomayor does not "lash out" at the President. She set forth the evidence presented by Plaintiffs showing the President's motive for the ban. She is strongly critical of her colleagues on the Court, but the President? Where does she lash out against him in this dissent?
She marshals the facts presented by plaintiffs and then concludes. "Taking all the evidence together, a reasonable observer would conclude that the Proclamation was driven primarily by anti-Muslim animus, rather than by the Govt's asserted natl security justifications."
It matters how this is characterized. It may well be that the effect of setting out Trump's anti-Muslim quotes as presented by plaintiffs is devastating. But it's b/c Trump's lashing out against Muslims so consistenly is shocking.
And b/c when the accumulated weight of the evidence is laid out page after page it makes the majority's refusal to engage this evidence more devastating. But to say that Justice Sotomayor "lashed out" at the President is a really frustrating mischaracterization of this dissent.
There is without question a case to be made that she is furious at her colleagues ("I dissent"). They are none too pleased w/her either ("whatever rhetorical advantage the dissent may see in [referencing Korematsu], Korematsu has nothing to do w/this case").
But we should be careful in suggesting that a sitting justice "lashed out" at the President of the United States. It introduces a personal conflict that is simply not present in the words of this dissent. The evidence of the President's anti-Muslim animus is in his own words.
Ironically, Justice Kennedy is the only justice who seems to be speaking directly to President Trump. That's the only way I can explain his concurrence. Unless it's also a farewell. Ok. I just tweeted myself into the abyss.
