I agree, quite apart from the merits of the case. Alito could only defend the Supreme Court's authority to intervene by grievously misrepresenting the facts. The reality is that there's no plausible argument SCOTUS had the power to do what it did. Why didn't that matter to six justices?
I would feel the same way if the Supreme Court issued a "liberal" shadow docket decision halting a conservative lower court order when it clearly lacked authority to do so. This is pretty basic stuff—it's hard to say SCOTUS is still functioning as a court when it acts without jurisdiction.
It also underscores the issue with the shadow docket that we don’t *actually* know the reasoning the majority used to claim it had jurisdiction.
We know what Alito’s thoughts were but are those shared by the majority of justices? Who’s to say?
See also: bsky.app/profile/brad...
Hypocrisy of Roberts Court is astounding: they’re inventing one set of rules to uphold gerrymandered maps that benefit white voters & Republicans in states like Texas while using a completely different set of rules to strike down maps that benefit racial minorities & Democrats
“[T]he use of an unconstitutional district in the November election and the election of a Member of the House of Representatives whose entitlement to the office would be tainted. That is a prospect this Court should not countenance.”
The gall of Alito to write this…
![SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 25A914
NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, ET AL. v. MICHAEL WILLIAMS, ET AL.
ON APPLICATION FOR STAY
No. 25A915
PETER KOSINSKI, ET AL. v. MICHAEL WILLIAMS, ET AL.
ON APPLICATION FOR STAY
[March 2, 2026]
The applications for
stay presented
to
JUSTICE
SOTOMAYOR and by her referred to the Court are granted.
The January 21, 2026 order entered by the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, Index No. 164002/2025, is stayed pending the disposition of the appeal in the New York state courts and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari in this Court, if such a writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the issuance of the mandate of this Court.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreienrxbkmyb6tleuhcuei5ouveel7phkglifhixxbcj7sjedrnv3sq@jpeg)
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 25A914 NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, ET AL. v. MICHAEL WILLIAMS, ET AL. ON APPLICATION FOR STAY No. 25A915 PETER KOSINSKI, ET AL. v. MICHAEL WILLIAMS, ET AL. ON APPLICATION FOR STAY [March 2, 2026] The applications for stay presented to JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and by her referred to the Court are granted. The January 21, 2026 order entered by the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, Index No. 164002/2025, is stayed pending the disposition of the appeal in the New York state courts and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari in this Court, if such a writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the issuance of the mandate of this Court.
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE KAGAN and JUSTICE JACKSON join, dissenting from grant of stay. The Court's 101-word unexplained order can be summarized in just 7: "Rules for thee, but not for me." Time and again, this Court has said that federal courts have limited jurisdiction. Time and again, this Court has said that federal courts should not interfere with state-court litigation. Time and again, this Court has said that federal courts should not meddle with state election laws ahead of an elec-tion. Today, the Court says: except for this one, except for this one, and except for this one. Ignoring every limit on federal courts' authority, the Court takes the unprecedented step of staying a state trial court's decision in a re-districting dispute on matters of state law without giving the State's highest court a chance to act. Because that order violates basic principles of jurisdiction, federalism, and equity, I respectfully dissent.
BREAKING: SCOTUS blocks New York state court redistricting order, over the strong dissent of the Democratic appointees.
Breaking: Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court Order That Redrew Congressional Map in Staten Island, with Ominous Implications for Voting Rights Act electionlawblog.org?p=154596
Was wondering this too… do you think they’d release NY-11 before Callais and tip their hand?
It’s a direct appeal to Alito, Thomas, Kavanaugh, Roberts, and Barrett.
The Conference of Catholic Bishops is... not playing around in this brief.
www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25...
What the Roberts Court Is Actually Trying to Accomplish It’s not about Trump. By Sarah Isgur
Spiritually, you already knew, right
holy shit hahahahhaha
People actually rely on him and the family separation woman for their legal news and analysis.
It will be a public service.
Kagan explains this in detail in her concurrence too lmao. So embarrassing.
Kagan literally writes this explicitly in her concurrence… it’s basic reading comprehension.
The establishment legal press corps’s willingness to accept Sarah Isgur’s desperate rebrand as a Thoughtful Legal Pundit media personality remains mystifying and embarrassing
Post from Sarah Isgur responding to a critique of Thomas, Alito, or Kavanaugh on the other site: “Perhaps a fair point—after all they voted to strike down Biden's student loan debt forgiveness. But then what do you think of Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson? They, of course, voted to uphold Biden's debt forgiveness.”
Checking in on Dispatch SCOTUS Blog for more neutral very well informed very smart commentary.
i also think if you’re going to write a piece about the court’s independence from Trump you might want to include some data about how often they have sided with him *this* term
personally I think the New York Times’ chief legal correspondent should know that the court was not a 6-3 conservative majority during Trump’s first term
jfc that's embarassing
With New Momentum, Republican States Push Broader Limits for Trans Americans In states that once focused mainly on health care and sports for transgender minors, debates now revolve around the validity of transgender identity.
The subheadline on this NYT piece is going to turn me into the Joker.
Like... this... is exactly what trans people have been saying was going to happen for years.
John Roberts used a fake "doctrine" to manufacture the outcome he wanted generate precisely these headlines / this coverage.
This is the first time in a while that I’ve actually listened to him for more than :30 and holy shit this is incomprehensible babbling.
John Roberts has somehow created a regal impunity, in a republic nonetheless influenced by British common law, stronger than that enjoyed by the British royals themselves. In-f’ing-credible.
That movie has soured me on basically any new Star Wars project. I can’t bring myself to watch.
I remember sitting with my brother in the theater sharing the distinct feeling of what the hell did we just witness.
Incoherence and incompetence at every artistic level.
Worth recalling that it wasn’t as 9-0 as it may have seemed. slate.com/news-and-pol...
slate.com/news-and-pol...
The Department of Homeland Security has had to correct information provided to at least five states after its SAVE voter tool misidentified some voters as noncitizens, according to correspondence between state and federal officials.
With @texastribune.org
Repeat after me:
An executive order is not a royal edict; it is not law. It is a direction to the executive branch as to how to carry out the law.
Also:
Key parts of Trump's last EO on elections have been stopped by federal courts, ruling that the President has no role to play in federal elections
