Picture This: An Unbiased Supreme Court

There’s a revealing & disturbing photo of the 4 female Justices who have increasingly voted in unison on key cases. How’s that so? I’ll answer with 2 Qs: Why is it women who play ID politics get away with a “sisters” pic? Can you imagine if 5 male Justices did a “bros” pic?

Of course, we’ve all been told it’s to be assumed women are more “sensitive” to “righteousness” than “insensitive” and inherently “biased” men, at least, those who don’t kiss the “I Am Woman, Hear Me Roar,” Blarney Stone. The point can be debated in social circles without much fanfare or consequences. BUT, when the point plays a central role in the U.S. Supreme Court’s deliberations on cases that will affect the future of the nation, it’s downright (to use one of the female Justices’ favorite terms) “unconstitutional.”

Case in point, of course, is the latest oral arguments just held before the Justices in a case that will decide the Trump Administration’s view on birthright citizenship and nationwide injunctions being issued against it on this and a plethora of other major executive orders. Almost as if on cue, Justice Sotomayor kept interrupting Trump’s attorney so loudly and often that Chief Justice Roberts had to kindly tell her to cut it out. From her questions to that counsel, Justice Jackson did all but announce how she was going to rule in the case, i.e., against Trump. And, the supposed “conservative” female on the bench, Barrett, couldn’t grasp what’s the problem with nationwide injunctions that didn’t exist before a liberal court went wild with them starting after Obama became president. Meanwhile, stone-faced Justice Kagan looked like she wanted to eat Trump’s lawyer. Enough. Grow up, girls. Do your sworn constitutional duty to really be impartial.

Davd Soul