Join Amazon Prime for exclusive deals, fast shipping, and endless entertainment! Sign up now!
During the recent Supreme Court session, Justice Amy Coney Barrett has started to come into her own.
Some people have interpreted that as her going rogue.
Is this Barrett going rogue or is this Barrett just taking a new approach to conservative thinking?
Rogue Justice
During the Rahimi v. United States, Barrett was in an open feud with Justice Clarence Thomas.
She was openly challenging Justice Thomas on several points that he had made.
Barrett has also sided with the liberal justices on numerous occasions, all of which has the media leaning into the idea that she has gone rogue.
But has she? Or is she just taking a more modern approach rather than drawing a line in the on every issue?
Colleen Kerwick, an attorney in New York, seems to believe that is the case, adding, “To the contrary, she is demonstrating that she isn’t beholden to anyone.”
Barrett and Thomas already got into it during the presidential immunity ruling.
Keswick commented on that as well, stating, “With respect to the decision concerning presidential immunity, she was the calm in the storm.
“The majority focused on a need to protect ‘strong, energetic and vigorous leadership.’
“Barrett agreed that the threat of criminal prosecution would dampen a president’s ardor but qualified that if a president commits a crime related to unprivileged acts that we can look at his privileged acts for proof of criminal intent.
“Most students of the law would agree with Barrett’s opinion.”
If you go back and look at the history of this court, all of Trump’s appointees have crossed the aisle at some point, usually when Chief Justice Roberts has done so.
There is a word for that… balance.
We may not like all the decisions they are making, but if it is the right decision, is that a bad thing?
