This ruling violates well-established precedents concerning this Court’s equitable discretion and needlessly injects chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections.
Ketanji Brown Jackson: “This ruling violates well-established precedents concerning this Court’s equitable discretion and needlessly injects…”
Editor's note · Context
Dissenting opinion on Supreme Court ruling regarding mail-in voting.
Share
More from Ketanji Brown Jackson
The Court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful.
To be sure, the Court has not foreclosed States from challenging this blatantly unconstitutional Order.
With this decision, the Court has now manipulated Bruen into a free-for-all that lets the Judiciary thwart the will of legislatures by privileging access to firearms above all else.
When I get invitations to do things, I always have them screened by the legal office, the public information office, just to make sure that there are no ethical conflicts, that this is not a fundraiser, you know.