Sonia Sotomayor swipes at Supreme Court rejecting precedent again
Justice Sonia Sotomayor sharply criticized the Supreme Court for increasingly adopting positions once voiced only in dissents,saying during oral argument in Little v. Hecox,”We’ve been doing an awful lot of that lately.” She pressed DOJ lawyer Hashim Mooppan over the department’s brief asking the Court to embrace views expressed by minority dissenters in prior cases. The comment came amid a string of major rulings and looming decisions in which the Court has overturned or limited long-standing precedents-most notably Dobbs (abortion) and Students for Fair Admissions (affirmative action)-and may further curtail precedents like Humphrey’s Executor. Sotomayor has repeatedly offered pointed critiques from the bench this term, and the justices appeared likely split along ideological lines in the sports cases, with the three liberal justices favoring the biological male athletes and the conservative majority inclined to uphold state restrictions.The Court is expected to issue opinions in these and several other high-profile cases by the end of June.
Sotomayor swipes at Supreme Court rejecting precedent: ‘We’ve been doing an awful lot of that lately’
Justice Sonia Sotomayor offered sharp commentary on Tuesday about the Supreme Court‘s recent rulings, claiming the high court has adopted several past dissenting opinions as new rulings.
During oral arguments for Little v. Hecox, one of two cases the Supreme Court heard Tuesday regarding state laws limiting women’s sports to biological women, Sotomayor questioned Justice Department lawyer Hashim Mooppan about the DOJ’s position on how to handle the claim that Idaho’s law violates the equal protection clause. She pointed to how the DOJ’s brief asked the high court to adopt the opinion of a dissent in a prior ruling.
“You’re asking the court to adopt views expressed by two minority dissenting judges in this case. We’ve been doing an awful lot of that lately,” Sotomayor asked, to which Mooppan grinned.
“You’re smiling because it’s true. But you’re asking us to adopt an approach that we have rejected as a majority court and accept what dissenters are doing, correct?” Sotomayor continued.
The Supreme Court has undone several key precedents in recent years, including with the 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization regarding abortion and the 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. The high court also looks poised to strike down or significantly roll back the 1935 ruling in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which would expand the president’s ability to fire independent agency heads.
Sotomayor has offered several recent barbs during oral arguments, including by seemingly alluding to President Donald Trump giving Elon Musk a job in his administration as an example of corruption and claiming that the Trump administration asked the high court to “destroy the structure of government.”
Sotomayor and the other two liberal justices appeared likely on Tuesday to side with the biological male athletes suing to participate in women’s sports, but the conservative majority on the high court appeared likely to side with the two states in upholding their laws.
SUPREME COURT CONSIDERS HOW DEFINING SEX WOULD AFFECT TRANSGENDER SPORTS BANS
The Supreme Court is expected to release opinions in both cases by the end of June. The two cases are some of the most highly anticipated decisions still to come from the high court this term.
The pair of cases regarding women’s sports laws is among several other high-profile cases the justices have heard or will hear this term. Other notable cases include challenges to Trump’s sweeping tariffs, birthright citizenship, late-arriving mail ballots, and gun laws. Decisions in the other high-profile cases could come as soon as Wednesday or, at the latest, by the end of June.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
