The dissent is displeased with our decision on this score, but a contradiction lies at the heart of its critique. First, the dissent assures us that the immovable property exception applies with irresistible force—nothing more than a matter of “hornbook law.” Post, at 3–10 (opinion of THOMAS, J.). But then, the dissent claims that allowing the Washington Supreme Court to address that exception is a “grave” decision that “casts uncertainty” over the law and leaves lower courts with insufficient “guidance.” Post, at 3, 13–14. Both cannot be true. If the immovable property exception presents such an easy question, then it’s hard to see what terrible things could happen if we allow state court colleagues are no less versed than we in “hornbook law,” and we are confident they can and will faithfully apply it. And what if, instead, the question turns out to be more complicated than the dissent promises? In that case the virtues of inviting full adversarial testing will have proved themselves once again. Either way, we remain sanguine about the consequences.
You like?
Way too much cutesy alliteration. He and Rosenbaum are too showy IMO.
ReplyDeleteThe best writing is simple and clear. This is neither.
ReplyDeleteI completely disagree. They way Neil McGill Gorsuch callously squashes the individual rights of workers in favor of large multi-national coporations with the pen of a poet! Wow, I mean who wouldn't remain sanguine.
ReplyDelete1:45 - great post!
ReplyDeleteYou cannot put NG and RR in the same category. Yes, RR starts out her opinions with an interesting story or tale but she does not engage in Gorsuching. aNd, the body of her opinions are written in clear and straightforward prose.
ReplyDeleteNG , on the other hand, writes with such a self-satisfied and preening style, it's unreadable.
That being said, Kagan is the best writer going.
Yes Gorsuch is worse than Rosenbaum, but both are bad. Rosenbaum can be downright corny. I too like Kagan. I also liked Alito's dissent in Mathis.
ReplyDeleteI really like Rosenbaum’s writing style. Interesting and easy to read. Same with Carnes and Pryor. I think Gorsuch might be trying a little too hard right now. Big shoes to fill.
ReplyDeleteCutesie, preening and almost unintelligible, with run on sentences. I too prefer Kagan and Carnes. They write simply but effectively and their opinions always make interesting reading.
ReplyDeleteWhat is preening?
ReplyDeleteThis excerpt makes me intellectually nauseous. I sure do miss Judge Merrick Garland...
ReplyDeleteCan't abide Carnes. His writing displays his anger and contempt for all those that disagree with him.
ReplyDeleteI was in front of Judge Rosenbaum when she was a mag and later a district judge. Judge Rosenbaum is the best. She cares deeply about getting issues right and being fair.
ReplyDeleteHer opinions are clear, intelligent and appropriate.
Judge Rosenbaum writes like she has ten law clerks working for her and their names are Calliope, Clio, Euterpe, Thalia, Melpomene, Terpsichore, Erato, Polyhymnia, Urania and Hand.