« Slightly frustrating | Main | This is NOT The Onion... »

Not the way to write a Supreme Court brief....

I refer to this brief, filed on behalf of some anti-2A legislators, with a Senator as counsel (or ostensible counsel, nobody in DC with any power writes their stuff).

First argument heading: "The Court Should Reject Petitioners' Efforts To Re-Enlist It In A Political "Project.""

Let's see, some samples:

"in the wake of a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign to shape this Court's composition, no less, and an industrial-strength influence campaign aimed at this Court. Indeed, petitioners and their allies have made perfectly clear that they seek a partner in a "project" to expand the Second Amendment and thwart gun- safety regulations. Particularly in an environment where a growing majority of Americans believes this Court is "motivated mainly by politics," rather than by adherence to the law...."

"The lead petitioner's parent organization, the National Rifle Association (NRA), promoted the confirmation (and perhaps selection) of nominees to this Court who, it believed, would "break the tie" in Second Amendment cases."

"The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies published an article this spring describing what recent changes to the Court's composition mean for this very case."

"This commentary is of particular note because it was published by an organization that has such a prominent role in the Republican Party's efforts to shape the federal judiciary in favor of donor interests."

"From October Term 2005 through October Term 2017, this Court issued 78 5-4 (or 5-3) opinions in which justices appointed by Republican presidents provided all five votes in the majority. In 73 of these 5-4 decisions, the cases concerned interests important to the big funders, corporate influencers, and political base of the Republican Party."

"With bare partisan majorities, the Court has influenced sensitive areas like voting rights, partisan gerrymandering, dark money, union power, regulation of pollution, corporate liability, and access to federal court, particularly regarding civil rights and discrimination in the workplace."

And, of course, the rant closes with a grandiose threat:

"The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be "restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.""