I already boosted this, but just want to underscore what a great and important piece of writing this is.
An unflinching look at SCOTUS and the wave of right-wing legal experiments headed there in this next session (via the ideologically captured 5th Circuit).
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/10/new-supreme-court-term-bad-cases.html
Follow
I mean, it's unflinching but also unrealistic, full of misrepresentations of what rulings said that just don't match what we can read with our own eyes in the opinions that were handed down.
This article is a work of historical fiction, but it gets clicks, so *shrug* right?
It still needs to be called out for being so misinformative, though, even if Slate profits off of selling the story.
@volkris
Are there specific examples you'd like to highlight? Which rulings were misrepresented? In what ways?