Latest Breaking News

I'm not sure why you keep misstating not only the facts but also my posts. Let's review.

My first post simply stated in its entirety that "No dissents to the grant of certiorari were noted." That is an undeniably true statement.

You responded by claiming that "SCOTUS already granted cert months ago." That is an undeniably untrue statement since no petition for cert was even filed until late September.

I explained why you were mistaken in my next post, but went on to clarify that the three liberal justices not only had dissented from the grant of a partial stay, but also had "made it clear that they believed the executive order was unconstitutional" and, for good measure, I added that I think they still adhere to that view.

Notwithstanding my having, I thought, clarified where I believe the three liberal stand notwithstanding the absence of any dissents to the grant of cert, you came back with a post that essentially reiterated what I had said, but somehow construed what I said as saying the opposite.

So I tried again, posting that "I have no doubt that the three justices are of the view that the executive order is unconstitutional" and that I think they are correct. I also indicated that I don't know why they didn't note a dissent to the grant of cert, but that its not uncommon for justices to support cert even when they believe the lower court ruling is correct.

I would have thought that would end it, but instead, you have invented out of whole cloth the semi-libelous claim that I've suggested that the three justices have "flipped" on whether birthright citizenship is unconstitutional. How you came to that conclusion is beyond me. But then again you still haven't conceded that cert wasn't actually granted with respect to these cases until this week, not months ago as you have claimed

Facts matter, my friend.