I think a recent Strict Scrutiny episode offered a reason for why you might call Breyer non-ideological:
Apparently he was very concerned about the actual ramifications of a decision to individual people, rather than being concerned about having an ironclad logical process in support of the decision. So if you had a case where you thought the logical reasoning should probably result in X, but X is a clearly inequitable/preposterous outcome, he’d be inclined to rule Not X.
Not sure why anyone is taking this literally instead of as being the latest round of the same bullshit every president says before nominating whoever the fuck they want. I mean, I’m not all that optimistic about Biden’s nominee, but this statement is meaningless.
This is even worse than I thought from your earlier post. Like the harm Breyer sold out to avoid was a father taking custody of their own child? Unless there are some details missing in your cliffs that seems like what should have happened anyway.
Really wish he had picked someone younger, but at least she seems more liberal than many of the other possibilities. The age is just such an important part of this and she’s older than Barrett.
Dems actually care about picking someone qualified, and its hard to find a “qualified” person in their 40s. Of course this is another self inflicted asymmetrical warfare problem for the Dems because the Rs will happy appoint a 25 year old is they are reliably racist.
In 1996, Jackson married surgeon Patrick G. Jackson, a sixth-generation Harvard graduate. The couple have two daughters. Patrick Jackson’s twin brother is the brother-in-law of Janna Ryan, wife of former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.
Right. Just like with gerrymandering, we need to play hardball as much as possible to counteract them. Biden should have nominated someone in her early 40s.