Tensions on the Supreme Court have flared this term as justices have clashed with each other and with lawyers at oral arguments amid a wave of Trump-era emergency appeals.
These exchanges at any other forum would hardly even raise an eyebrow. But at the Supreme Court, where decorum and respect are bedrock principles and underpin even the most casual cross-talk between justices, these recent clashes are significant.
After one particularly acrimonious exchange, several longtime Supreme Court watchers noted that the behavior displayed was unlike anything they’d seen in “decades” of covering the high court.
Here are two high-profile Supreme Court spats that have made headlines in recent weeks.
100 DAYS OF INJUNCTIONS, TRIALS AND ‘TEFLON DON’: TRUMP SECOND TERM MEETS ITS BIGGEST TESTS IN COURT
Mahmoud v. Taylor
Last month, Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor quarreled briefly during oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor, a case focused on LGBTQ-related books in elementary schools and whether parents with religious objections can “opt out” children being read such material.
The exhange occurred when Sotomayor asked Mahmoud attorney Eric Baxter about a book titled “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” a story that invoked a same-sex relationship. Sotomayor asked Baxter whether exposure to same-sex relationships in children’s books like the one in question should be considered “coercion.”
Baxter began responding when Alito chimed in.
“I’ve read that book as well as a lot of these other books,” Alito said. “Do you think it’s fair to say that all that is done in ‘Uncle Bobby’s Wedding’ is to expose children to the fact that there are men who marry other men?”
After Baxter objected, Alito noted that the book in question “has a clear message” but one that some individuals with “traditional religious beliefs don’t agree with.”
Sotomayor jumped in partway through Alito’s objection, “What a minute, the reservation is – “
“Can I finish?” Alito said to Sotomayor in a rare moment of frustration.
He continued, “It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.”
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ASKS SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW EL SALVADOR DEPORTATION FLIGHT CASE
“There is a growing heat to the exchanges between the justices,” Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley observed on social media after the exchange.
A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools
The Sotomayor-Alito spat made some court-watchers uncomfortable. But it paled in comparison to the heated, tense exchange that played out just one week later between Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and Lisa Blatt, a litigator from the firm Williams & Connolly.
The exchange took place during oral arguments in A.J.T. v. Osseo Area Schools, a case about whether school districts can be held liable for discriminating against students with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
Gorsuch scolded Blatt, an experienced Supreme Court litigator who was representing the public schools in the case, after she accused the other side of “lying.”
What played out was a remarkably heated exchange, if only by Supreme Court standards. Several court observers noted that they had never seen Gorsuch so angry, and others remarked they had never seen counsel accuse the other side of “lying.”
“You believe that Mr. Martinez and the Solicitor General are lying? Is that your accusation?” Gorsuch asked Blatt, who fired back, “Yes, absolutely.”
Counsel “should be more careful with their words,” Gorsuch told Blatt in an early tone of warning.
“OK, well, they should be more careful in mischaracterizing a position by an experienced advocate of the Supreme Court, with all due respect,” Blatt responded.
Several minutes later, Gorsuch referenced the lying accusation again, “Ms. Blatt, I confess I’m still troubled by your suggestion that your friends on the other side have lied.”
“I’d ask you to reconsider that phrase,” he said. “You can accuse people of being incorrect, but lying, lying is another matter.”
He then began to read through quotations that she had entered before the court, before she interrupted again.
“I’m not finished,” Gorsuch told Blatt, raising his voice.
“Fine,” she responded.
Shortly after, Gorsuch asked Blatt to withdraw her earlier remarks that accused the other side of lying.
“Withdraw your accusation, Ms. Blatt,” Gorsuch said.
“Fine, I withdraw,” she shot back.
Plaintiffs said in rebuttal that they would not dignify the name-calling.
The exchange sparked some buzz online, including from an experienced appeals court litigator, Raffi Melkonian, who wrote on social media, “I’ve never heard Justice Gorsuch so angry.”
“Both of those moments literally stopped me in my tracks,” said Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center. “You might want to listen somewhere where you can cringe in peace.”
Mark Joseph Stern, a court reporter for Slate, described the exchange as “extremely tense” and described Blatt’s behavior as “indignant and unrepentant.”
Read the full article here
