Charitably, you’ve based this on nothing.
https://twitter.com/politico/status/1487063610279006214
Kennedy: I don’t know about this 15-part balancing test, Stephen. Is it statistically based?
O’Connor: Where do you see undue burden in this data?
Breyer: You need to look at the regressions I’ve done on tabs 4-19, summarized on 20.
Kennedy: Ahh
O’Connor: Oh this is beautiful
O’Connor: Where do you see undue burden in this data?
Breyer: You need to look at the regressions I’ve done on tabs 4-19, summarized on 20.
Kennedy: Ahh
O’Connor: Oh this is beautiful
Pace Politico, no conservatives joined Breyer’s opinion in June Medical Services. The Chief Justice filed a concurrence, and every other conservative dissented.
Kennedy joined in WWH v. Hellerstedt, but he also wrote part of the decision in Casey before Breyer was on the Court.
Kennedy joined in WWH v. Hellerstedt, but he also wrote part of the decision in Casey before Breyer was on the Court.
I’m just gobsmacked that an editor could read a paragraph like this and think “ok no notes, looks good; in fact let’s make it the tweet.”
Politico deleted the tweet (which makes my first tweet above disappear from search results—a Twitter policy I don’t totally understand).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
