Justice Sotomayor, Civil Procedure, and the “Tradition” of Unanimous Debut Opinions

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Howard Wasserman says:

    I just posted this at Faculty Lounge, but I will repeat it here: I did not read Thomas as taking a swipe at Sotomayor, as much as taking a swipe at the Collateral Order Doctrine as a legal rule that is illegitimate (given recent developments such as § 1292(b)), unnecessary, and too value-driven. He was not disagreeing with Sotomayor’s analysis as much as the Court’s (as a whole) continued adherence to a bad legal rule.

  2. Joe says:

    As you note, the ‘precedent’ was exaggerated, as noted as far back at “The Brethren” when Justice Blackmun’s first opinion was lambasted by Marshall.

    Thomas didn’t criticize “Sotomayor” as some seem to imply but a certain precedent which she (and seven others) cited. Sotomayor noted during her hearings that she made sure to explain her reasoning, including responding to the other side of the argument, in her opinions. So, Thomas’ opinion should be appreciated by her as a “welcome Sonia” moment.

  3. Brian says:

    “Then again, Justice Breyer went on to serve a remarkably long tenure as the Court’s most junior Justice. Could there be a “Curse of the Nonunanimous Debut Opinion”?”

    That a justice has had a long tenure as the Court’s most junior justice is another way of saying that the justices have all remained in good health for a long period of time. Doesn’t sound like a “curse” to me.