Harvard Constitutional Law Expert Says Justice 'Misleadingly' Quoted Him In Roe Ruling

[diehardblue]

Outspoken Harvard University Law Professor Laurence Tribe on Saturday accused conservative Supreme Court justices of “misleadingly quoting” him to justify their decision to throw out Roe v. Wade.

“Don’t be fooled,” warned Tribe, an expert on the Constitution. “The writings from which the Court cherry-picked my quotes were totally supportive of the result in Roe,” he added.

Tribe also called out Justice Samuel Alito for not bothering to fix inaccuracies in his “shoddy” ruling that had been pointed out by historians in his draft of the opinion released last month.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/harvard-constitutional-law-expert-says-justice-misleadingly-quoted-him-in-roe-ruling/ar-AAYSg60?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBnb7Kz

[TwilightZone]

1. Considering Tribe's relatively-high profile, they probably did it on purpose.

It quite fits in the context of "owning the libs".

[SoCalDavidS]

2. As If That Was Not Their Intent To Begin With. nt

[Ray Bruns]

10. Exactly, Since Alito was making his argument up out of wholecloth,

It really didn't matter what the argument was.

[SoCalDavidS]

14. You Mean "His Asshole" Rather Than "Wholecloth." nt

[gratuitous]

3. Alito reverse engineered his ruling

And that means he had to misuse the law and facts that he had not the ones he would have wished he had.

[gibraltar72]

4. They are used to lying.

[thesquanderer]

6. You can't ask the founding fathers what they meant, but you can certainly consult with...

...the living people whose work you are referencing. But that would imply that you care.

[cloudboy07]

7. The lower court's should never----

charge anybody for perjury with 4 confirmed liar's on the el Supreme Court!

[SoCalDavidS]

15. If Ya Ain't Lyin', Ya Ain't Tryin'. nt

[NullTuples]

8. The Roberts Court going ahead with the citation anyway was a flex

Sure, they could've fixed it; they didn't feel like it. And that lets everyone know that some objective truth - what Tribe actually meant, and the historical inaccuracies - is irrelevant when it comes to them making a ruling. In short, they are telling anyone who opposes them that they can do whatever they want.

[in2herbs]

12. An impeachment hearing would allow Tribe to straighten the record re the

court's intentional misinterpretation of his papers.

Impeachment is necessary for there to be truth in our history. We cannot allow the liars and hypocrites to write our history.

[DippyDem]

13. +1

[czarjak]

9. Secret Societies really aren't. Huh, JUDGE?

[moniss]

11. The hard realization is

that the SC cons don't care about being accurate, being hypocrites or issuing rulings using one line of justification and days later issuing another completely arguing against their previous reasoning. They don't care. The hard facts are that any laws we do pass that they don't like will be struck down no matter the reasoning or facts. It is a fact that none of this will change until they are no longer in control of the court. In fact they will be teeing up movie and TV censorship cases along with the book banning/course material censorship push which has spread like wildfire with the GQP getting aggressive at all levels of society from local school boards on up. The New Puritans have no shame about being inaccurate or hypocritical. Just like the old ones.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

16. Alito's a lying sack of shit

But we all knew that.

[NCjack]

19. If I were a juror in a trial of anyone charged of having or assisting an abortion,

I would be sympathetic to an argument that the SCOTUS decision was illegal because 6 of the Justices had lied in their Senate hearings for the purpose of getting on the Court and casting their vote on this decision.

[YoshidaYui]

20. shoddy ruling

sounds about right.

[Ohio Joe]

21. You mean they lied... Again...

I'm shocked

[SWBTATTReg]

22. I thought it was shoddy work. From what I have seen, of the decision and the explanation

in making it, any medical procedure done on the body not even vaguely mentioned in the Constitution is now unconstitutional.

Idiots. Can't even practice decent English when writing up decisions, getting them ready to publish to the American public. They know better.