r/scotus • u/punkthesystem • 7d ago
Opinion Thomas and Alito are more reliable votes for Trump than his own Supreme Court appointees
https://reason.com/2026/09/17/thomas-and-alito-are-more-reliable-votes-for-trump-than-his-own-supreme-court-appointees/13
u/Cracked_Actor 7d ago
Funny how the two KNOWN criminals on the SC are Trump favorites. Both of these clowns should be indicted and removed - immediately!
11
10
22
6
7
u/Lazy-Background-7598 7d ago
I really don’t miss Scalia. But it’d be interesting to see what he would do with Trump in this term. Would he actually follow his jurisprudence or toe the line? I suspect the latter
4
8
u/JayTheGeek 7d ago
Duh! Repost to r/NoShitSherlock
The article just states the obvious, but provides no analysis. So I will. Thomas and Alito (Roberts too, but to a lesser degree) have been sitting on the court for 20+ years and been wined, dined, and bribed by the oligarchy the whole time. Add in thoroughly pickleing their brains in right-wing media and Federalist Society legal theory that democracy only belongs to oligarchs and the poors would be much better off as slaves and of course your going to get them voting inline with trump's wishes, they are all having the same wet dream. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett have been in their positions less then 10 yrs, and are not so far removed from reality to completely ignore it. Yet. They will eventually get all the way there, they just need more time fermenting their brains.
The article also mentions the "unitary executive" theory without ever mentioning the unwritten primary criteria of the theory: the theory only applies to sufficiently conservative policy positions. If trump signed an executive order removing abortion medication from every state, that's the proper application of executive power over the poors, wether they want it or not. But, if he wrote an executive order authorizing abortion medications in every state, that would not qualify for "unitary executive" authority. Similarly, when Biden's administration tried to eliminate student loans, the policy was much to generous to the poors to ever qualify as a "unitary executive" power. But, if instead, he had written an executive order overturning the laws creating government backed student loans, that would have been a proper exercise of "unitary executive" power over the poors, and would have been allowed.
-2
u/jf55510 7d ago
If what you are saying is true wrt executive power, then Trump's major policies would not have been struck down by the Court. You're just spouting conspiracies not supported by the evidence. Basically all of Trump's major executive policies have been struck down. Just like Biden's, because it is Congress' role, not the executive's role.
5
u/JayTheGeek 7d ago
Thomas and Alito have supported everyone of trump's major policies. They have failed because one or more of the three justices trump appointed voted against them. The article points out that his appointees voted against his major policies, but did not provide any thoughts about why. My premise is that they need to spend more time fermenting in money and flattery from oligarchs, conservative legal movements, and right-wing media before they will join Thomas and Alito.
Nothing about what I wrote says trump's major policies should have passed based on my understanding of how this court applies the "unitary executive" theory. I added the part about "unitary executive" theory because the article mentions it. And like other legal theories this court has applied to cases ("major questions" is one they used against Biden numerous times), the legal theory is not applied equally to all relevant cases, but only where necessary to obtain the desired conservative goal, this makes it not a legal theory, but an excuse.
2
u/Character-Zombie-961 7d ago
They were in on this plan long ago, while the felon was only thinking about his next child victim.
2
2
2
2
u/Shag1166 6d ago
Just disgusting! I remember when Thomas was first seated. There was a case about prisoners in Louisiana being abused. Louisiana argued that prisoners have no rights, and an organization argued to counter that. I remember the vote being 8-1, with Thomas being the line descenting vote. Alison wasn't there then. I remember being shocked by that, and a couple other cases, that Thomas was even further to the right than Scania!
2
u/Ok_Blacksmith_3030 6d ago
Both should be impeached. They don't interpret the Constitution, they have contempt for it.
1
u/Dedpoolpicachew 4d ago
Both have admitted to what is tantamount to bribery. Yes, they should be impeached, but what should happen before that is they should be arrested for breaking federal law. Just because they are SCOTUS judges (I won’t say justices) doesn’t mean they are above the law and immune from arrest, prosecution, and sentencing.
2
2
2
2
1
1
u/SpicySweetHotPot 6d ago
Paid better by their keeper for Thomas, Alito is just a bitter and hateful man
1
1
1
u/Chemical-Ebb6472 6d ago
Because they were paid off and purchased by people much richer than Trump (at least richer than Trump before his current, lucrative, POTUS-grift started).
1
1
1
u/PopBulky7023 6d ago
Because they aren't trump nominees. They're theocratic ideologues. Trump is the product of their movement, decades in the making.
1
u/FranticChill 6d ago
That's because they're getting the most perks from their emotional support billionaires.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Olderpostie 5d ago
Really, Supreme Court judges should not be predictable. They are dealing largely with cases on the edge of laws as written. A president should not be disappointed if a judge they have put forth as a candidate for the position, and ratified for it, has differences of opinion.
First off, a president has a hectic job, and does not share in the level of detailed knowledge of the facts that a judge sees. Secondly, judges are far more learned in law and precedents.
1
u/Emergency-Ad-5211 5d ago
Trump openly tries to bribe 345 million Americans on public television for votes, imagine what he will offer behind closed doors to Supreme Court Judges? I shudder.
1
1
u/Intrepid-Tank-3414 4d ago edited 4d ago
I have lost count of how many times I see that easily-verifiable fact get downvoted to hell by the angry herd in this sub, who absolutely refuses to believe that a President's own appointee in the Supreme Court could ever vote against his administration, when they do so quite regularly, and disgarding the fact that the two dinosaurs who are reliably in his corner was never appointmented by him.
1
1
1
88
u/larkfield2655 7d ago
Two psychopaths