Justice Barrett has joined the bandwagon complaining that folks only describe as “big” cases those that divide #SCOTUS ideologically.
That’s not only belied by tons of actual evidence, but it obscures the extent to which it’s often the holdings the Court *chooses* to adopt that provoke such splits:
Bonus 226: What Makes a Case "...
Follow
... I think you're proving her point.
I've been hearing neutral academics going through the evidence for quite a while, and they back what Barrett says. Meanwhile, it seems you respond by... focusing on "big" cases, just as she said.
