Gorsuch blasts Sotomayor's dissent in
Christian web designer ruling: 'Reimagines'
facts from 'top to bottom'

Blasting a Sotomayor opinion is the equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. It's not as though she's writing anything so enlightening that it will be quoted a hundred years from now. This is the same woman who doesn't understand the tenth amendment.

notice all dissents in these rulings are the minority women.who are ruling on emotion (anger , not logic, in their dissent) not the Constitution. IMO That speaks ill of diversity and affirmative action emotional women in positions of power will destroy this country

How often have we seen banks refuse to do business with people or go so far as to close their existing accounts. There is rarely any consequence for banks that do this.

The Wide Latina checks some boxes, "competence" isn't one of them.

Justice Sotomayor is an ignorant, poorly reasoning leftist who should never have been elevated to the Supreme Court. Two colleagues on the court also fit that description.

The lib appointees are there to reliably rubber-stamp leftist policy and government control. Sometimes that requires amazing feats of contortionism. (Please, PLEASE, avoid visualizing this literally.)

The Wide Latina...."reimagines the facts". When the facts won't fit your cast iron, immutible leftist views, then the "facts" must be adjusted, however fraudulent this may be. Leftists are nothing as much as they are immune to facts and truths.

From a speech in 2001 by Sotomayer to UC Berserkly law school, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." Neil is wasting his time thinking that the racist, sexist Sotomayer will change her hateful opinion of white males.

The 3 Weird sisters from Macbeth, now sitting on the SCOTUS

Just look at Soto's photos...... she's a humorless hag ideologue, in a bad dye-job. The typical Dem female.

It must be very challenging for justices with any functioning brain cells to work with the three blind mice.

1) well someone has to tutor them on how to be a supreme court justice. Might as well be Gorsuch 2) how many times do we need to decide the same issue? What’s the difference between baking a wedding cake or taking wedding photos or designing a marriage website ?

Supreme Court meetings in the future are going to be a bit on the tense side. The conservatives think the liberals are emotional lightweights, and the liberals think the conservatives are fascists.

It's unfortunate that the conservative justices did not show the same wisdom, foresight and sense of justice after the 2020 election. A stolen presidency that could very well bring down the country is far more serious and blatantly wrong than some stupid wedding cake or web page. Millions of Americans were deceived and robbed by the Biden Crime Family. The cowardice of the SCOTUS and Mike Pence will never be forgotten.

The "dissents" were from the 3 Liberal women on the Supreme Court. Their babble proves --- once again --- that many women now in high places got there because of their plumbing and other body parts and not their brains. They "think" with their hearts because they care! Bull. To call them stupid is incorrect because their are, in fact, smart but they use their smarts to slant the world towards what they want it to look like, not how it really is. These three do that with written law ... and ignore the facts and only consider what they wish the law said. Simple questions: Should a black web designer be forced to make a web site for the KKK? Should a Jewish web designer be forced to make a web site for a neo-Nazi group? Should a Muslim web site developer be forced to make a web site for a group claiming Allah is fake? No? Of course not! And neither should a devote Christian be forced to develop a web site for gays showing them doing things she believes in her heart are sinful. Simple solution ... go find a gay web site developer!

Sotomayor has been the dumbest member of the court until Jackson came along. Gorsuch nailed it!

It helps to understand some aspects of how the Supreme Court functions. For the most part, the justices don't necessarily "write" their own opinions. Their law clerks compose several succesive rough drafts of their opinions for them, based upon each justice communicating to his/her clerks where the justice stands on the issues of the case. The clerks then use the appellate briefs of the parties to the litigation to come up with the reasoning within the rough drafts. A strong, intellectual justice like Scalia or Gorsuch then painstakingly reviews and re-writes the draft opinions over and over again through successive drafts. An intellectually weak justice tends to rely upon the work of the clerks without imposing his/her intellect to re-construct those drafts to conform the opinion--or dissenting opinion--to the justice's basic reasoning. In this instance, it appears that Sotomayor's dissent was the work of her law clerks, who relied overmuch upon the faulty "reasoning" of the appellate briefs. This is just intellectual laziness by Sotomayor and her law clerks. Each justice hires their own law clerks, usually from a pool of applicants who are either fresh from law school, having graduated near the top of their classes from prestigious schools, or who graduated a year or two earlier from those schools and who have spent a year or two working as clerks for judges in various federal circuit courts of appeal around the country. An intellectually rigorous SCOTUS justice will hire intellectually persuasive law clerks who know how to write and how to think through the morass of arguments presented in appellate briefs to come up with an opinion that is logically sound. An intellectually weak SCOTUS justice will hire less intelligent clerks who conform to his/her ideology. In consequence, the reasoning of the opinions of some justices is is regularly flawed, and it is up to the other justices and their clerks to examine and challenge the flawed reasoning of the less intellectually incisive opposing opinions.

The liberals on the Court are not serious women who revere the Constitution. They are social warriors who think it’s their mission to tear it down.

Who cares what Sotomayor, Kagan, or KJB think? We would be better served not knowing their deluded opinions.

Sotomayor said: 'They called the ruling "a new license to discriminate" and said the "symbolic effect of the decision is to mark gays and lesbians for second-class status.' LQGBT is being celebrated in every sector of society, so what does that make straight white males? I'm waiting for my parades.

I always question a woman in a position of power because they rule with emotions...not always logic....look at crooked Hillary ranting and raving about her loss in 2016...she ran into a very logical and determined man...President Trump...and is still p---ed off about his drive to win....the only reason he didn't win in 2020 was because some dirty politics was played on Americans because of covid...the china virus...and no one is ever going to convince me...they didn't do it on purpose...china has a lame duck in the White House...a compromised president was their goal....

2, Emotional women VOTING will destroy this country. The voting booth is no place to express maternal instincts. That is exactly why we have come to know the term "Nanny State".