Sotomayor is the only 'good' justice, and she's still a bourgeois bureaucrat in a broken system built to oppress the working masses.
She actually stands in opposition to the conservative justices. She's written some pretty scathing dissentions, and tends to be on the side of labor and against corporate rule.
For example, she upheld the 4th Amendment in a dissent when the court ruled that police can use evidence collected when they pull someone over for what they believe to be a violation, but which isn't actually against the law. She's also been vocally critical of the structure of the court which allows the current majority to simply grant Trump whatever legal justification he seeks. She also correctly identified that the goal of the Janus lawsuit was to weaken unions so they could be abolished, and I think made comments beyond the official dissent.
Again, she is still a SCOTUS justice, so her very role in society is problematic, as a bureaucrat in a bourgeois system, but she seems to push back on that system more than any other justice. I just need to keep reminding myself that she is still, by her very willingness to be a SCOTUS justice, in a bad role in society, and that keeps me from lionizing her the way libs did with RBG.
she's the only decent pick obama made, I'm actually surprised at it. Meanwhile Kagan is voting with conservatives left and right, just as you'd expect
It’s sickening to see even Canadian media labelling her as a “liberal champion” which is especially weird in Canada because American liberals are recognized as full on right wingers in Canada
ffs, it seems like you people don't get it - she was one of the good xenophobes.
As twitter OP noted: "Correction* it wasn’t her last ruling I read the date wrong "
Then via supremecourt.gov, and this summary table...
In the most recent ruling, RBG joined two dissenting opinions on a proposed drug to be used for executions (basically, they did not like ruling on a specific drug instead of addressing the constitutionality of the death penalty as such) in which their dissent obviously did not matter for shit because 4 vs 5.
The last case where RBG wrote her own dissenting opinion was about access to contraceptives without copay and such, ostensibly due to freedom of religion and complicity of employers in any provided healthcare, where again her dissent was irrelevant because4 vs 52 vs 7. lol 🤦It is quite hilarious though this whole idea: how in the USA your health insurance is linked to the employer ("No other country in the world bases its healthcare insurance system on whether and where someone is employed" ref) and somehow that makes them complicit even if they do not get to decide what healthcare you get.
So really, by that logic, if your employer pays you wages and then you go and spend that money in a way they also do not get to decide, would that not make them complicit in how you spent that money? What's next, employers need rights to screen all your online purchases so they do not become complicit in depraved shit like this?To think that all these things could have been avoided.
So in conclusion, death to America, the imperial system of measurement is an exemplar of toxic masculinity, rockets are phallic objects, and patriarchy bad, QED my arguments are as good as the supreme court.
