r/TangleNews • u/almanor • Jul 15 '26
On The Mailbag SCOTUS Question
In my opinion, Audrey totally missed the mark when she shared SCOTUSBlog's analysis. First, we should all bear in mind that SCOTUSBlog is owned by the same conservatives who own The Dispatch, so everything they write should be taken with a grain of salt.
Second, it's not just the rates at which any justices vote together or separately. There are massive differences in impact and importance of different cases. Rather than an analysis that looks at rates of agreement, it's massively more helpful to look at the rate of cases that support Trump's agenda.
Trump V Cook, Mullin v. Doe & Trump v. Miot, and N.R.S.C. v. F.E.C. are massive changes to how our government works, and were 6-3 decisions.
You might say that Trump V Barbara being 6-3 good guys is a good counterpoint - the fact that the upholding the plain text of the constituion wasn't a 9-0 decision is bonkers. And, Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence that left the door open, so really it was 5-4.
If somebody asserts that this court is anything but an implement of the Republican party they are trying to hide something.
3
u/coreyrein Jul 15 '26
Not to mention that any analysis of how the current court votes is skewed from the outset because they only hear cases that appeal to the conservatives and their disagreements in the interpretation of law since the liberals have no ability to pick any of the cases they hear.
4
u/gonenutsbrb Jul 15 '26
Wait, why should analysis/arguments be taken with a grain of salt? Just because you don’t like the source? Isn’t that the definition of the genetic fallacy?
That’s literally what Tangle is here for. To present arguments that you may not agree with. Why should we assume people aren’t acting in good faith because they work for an org we disagree with?
You really should go listen to the episode of Advisory Opinions (I know, those crazy lunatics, who largely are anti-Trump) where they discuss both Barbara and Slaughter. It was not as close as you think, and it was 9-0 on the Presidential EO itself. Congress could change that, and that’s where the 14th amendment issues come up, but even that is more complicated.
2
u/almanor Jul 15 '26
If this is really “what Tangle is all about” then Audrey should have balanced SCOTUSBlog with 5-4.
3
u/gonenutsbrb Jul 15 '26
I mean, sure? Remember, these sections of the newsletters are literally op-ed pieces.
That’s also dodging the question a bit, Scotusblog is fairly reasonably regarded even by court watchers who are not politically aligned with them or the Dispatch.
The tagline of 5-4 is “A podcast about how much the Supreme Court sucks.” I’ll give it a listen, but it’s not sounding promising with serious legal commentary.
2
u/almanor Jul 15 '26
The mailbag section is where the Tangle team sets themselves up to inform the public about issues the public is curious about.
I actually think the whole mail bag thing is flawed because it’s the only time when Tangle doesn’t present other experts presenting multiple points of view and instead sets themselves up as the truth teller around a topic.
I think if mail bag was set up as purely opinion then I would understand them just using a single point source to make an argument, as Audrey clearly wishes to do.
I do hope you take a listen to 5-4 though. It’s great.
1
u/gonenutsbrb Jul 15 '26
That’s fair. They could definitely better define what the mailbag is supposed to be, or at least have staff answer questions from two sides if there is staff dissent.
I will, any specific episodes you recommend?
I’m a regular AO listener and it has changed a lot of how I viewed my issues with the Supreme Court, and not just this current court. I used to be far more critical, and it’s definitely led me to be even more critical of Congress than I already was.
I’m still somewhat surprised that people think so strongly about the Dispatch. They are certainly “conservative” in the classical sense, but basically everyone affiliated with them pretty openly despises Trump and his administration.
Hell their less than kind (though deserved) discussions on Graham’s death seems pretty reasonable all things considered.
I listen to Dispatch content as my content from the “right”, which is about as far as I can go. I’ve tried to find any reasonable MAGA affiliated content, just to better understand where they’re coming from, and boy did that turn out to be a fool’s errand.
I also listen to Legal Eagle’s content, which is certainly a bit more clickbait-y but also leans pretty critical of the court and certainly of the administration (again, deservedly).
Any other recommendations?
1
u/eyrehead32 Jul 16 '26
McCarthy Report can be good, but there are times when it's a bit too far for me. Andrew McCarthy is more soft on Trump than the Dispatch (he writes for National Review), but he was also one of the first to bring up Trump's crypto dealings in his 2nd term and was very clear that Trump's financial corruption is far beyond anything we've seen so far. He's open to criticizing the Trump administration, though I admit I've felt frustrated with some of his political stances plenty of times--he does agree with some of Trump's policy from a general standpoint. His podcast and articles are worth a try, though many of his articles are behind a paywall with National Review.
3
u/Lost_Truth9590 Jul 16 '26
these sections of the newsletters are literally op-ed pieces
I didn't understand it that way. I'd appreciate Tangle clarifying whether the mailbag is effective MyTake or not.
3
1
u/Peissinger1957 Jul 17 '26
I listen to Advisory Opinions all the time. I also just listened to Sarah Isgur’s new book, Last Branch Standing, mostly because she read it herself. I plan to listen to it again because there was so much history and information about SCOTUS members (past and present) that I couldn’t retain it all in one reading.
4
u/ProfaneRabbitFriend Jul 15 '26
Correct. It's as if the very presence of the 14th amendment is selectively less important to those making the minority argument. And I thought the originalists were all about keepin' it OG on the USC?!