The Supreme Court's approach on 'history and tradition' is irking Amy Coney Barrett

[SARose]

By Devan Cole and John Fritze, CNN
Updated 10:15 AM EDT, Wed June 19, 2024

Washington
CNN
—
On a Supreme Court where the conservative supermajority increasingly leans on history as a guide, a dispute may be simmering over how many modern cases can be resolved by looking to the nation’s past.

Though Justice Clarence Thomas’ decision in a major trademark case last week was unanimous, it prompted a sharp debate led by Justice Amy Coney Barrett over the use of history to decide the case.

Barrett, the newest conservative on the court, accused Thomas, the most senior associate justice, of a “laser-like focus on the history” that “misses the forest for the trees.”

The back-and-forth could signal a recalibration by some members of the court of how and when to apply originalism, the dominant legal doctrine among the court’s conservatives that demands the Constitution be interpreted based on its original meaning.

Snip

More

Color me shocked!

[Mike Nelson]

1. I am...

... sorry she feels "irked." I am much more sorry for the victims of her deplorable Supreme Court decisions.

[RANDYWILDMAN]

2. Fractures means lots of 5-4

what a joke this court is.

Under originalism, Coney and Clarence should recuse themselves from the court and RETIRE since they themselves could not be justices, when the constitution was written...

[pwb]

3. She is right. I can tell by listening to them argue, that all

the do is change the message with word play.

[Deep State Witch]

4. Who Would Have Thought

That she would have turned out to be the voice of reason?

[sanatanadharma]

5. The history and tradition and reality for the Founders who were living in ...

The history and tradition and reality for the Founders who were living in, what was then and always is for all times, the most modern of times.
The revolution and the Constitution were not based upon, nor rooted in the past. America is built upon the future.
Nobody has ever lived in any epoch other that the most modern of times.
Seeking to limit the now to what-it-was in the past will putrefy the present; and that is a terrible present to give to the future.

[SARose]

6. Well said!

👏

[CanonRay]

7. Under originalism the 2nd amendment

means your ownership of flintlock rifles and black powder pistols cannot be abridged.