Author Archives: Cynical Jason
Dobbs Sentences #236: Part III A
Paragraph 4 of 5 Sentence 1 of 7 This sentence is a series of three claims: “Roe was on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided, Casey perpetuated its errors, and those errors do not concern some arcane corner of the law of little importance to the American people.” The […]
Dobbs Sentences #235: Part III A
Paragraph 3 of 5 Sentence 2 of 2 There are two claims in this sentence, and a lot going on in how those claims are being expressed: “For reasons already explained, Roe’s constitutional analysis was far outside the bounds of any reasonable interpretation of the various constitutional provisions to which it vaguely pointed.” The claims: […]
Dobbs Sentences #234: Part III A
Paragraph 3 of 5 Sentence 1 of 2 This sentence has two claims: “Roe was also egregiously wrong and deeply damaging.” The claims: I suppose you could make the case that the Court means the “also” to apply in parallel, but since the previous paragraph didn’t assert anything about deep damage, I’m not going to […]
Dobbs Sentences #233: Part III A
Part III A Paragraph 2 of 5 Sentence 3 of 3 This sentence looks like it has three claims: “It was ‘egregiously wrong’ on the day it was decided, see Ramos, 590 U. S., at ___ (opinion of Kavanaugh, J.) (slip op., at 7), and as the Solicitor General agreed at oral argument, it should […]
Dobbs Sentences #232: Part III A
Paragraph 2 of 5 Sentence 2 of 3 Just one claim in this sentence: “It betrayed our commitment to ‘equality before the law’.” 163 U. S., at 562 (Harlan, J., dissenting). Here it is with the subject clarified: Plessy definitely violated the principle of equality before the law, but I’m not sure how to go […]
Dobbs Sentences #231: Part III A
Paragraph 2 of 5 Sentence 1 of 3 Just one claim in this sentence: “The infamous decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, was one such decision.” By “one such decision,” I assume they mean that it’s one of the “more damaging” decisions featuring “erroneous interpretation of the Constitution.” I don’t know anybody who’s going to disagree […]
Dobbs Sentences #230: Part III
Paragraph 1 of 5 Sentence 2 of 2 This sentence has two claims: “An erroneous interpretation of the Constitution is always important, but some are more damaging than others.” The claims: The first claim is a subjective judgment, so that will wait. The second makes sense, but let’s see if any supporting examples are brought […]
Dobbs Sentences #229: Part III
Paragraph 1 of 5 Sentence 1 of 2 I count zero claims in the next sentence: “The nature of the Court’s error.” Actually, this isn’t a sentence–it’s a fragment. It’s in italics*, so it’s probably intended as a title or a tag rather than as a sentence, so . . . nothing to report, chief. […]
Dobbs Sentences #228: Part III
Paragraph 8 of 8 Sentence 1 of 1 I count six claims in this sentence: “In this case, five factors weigh strongly in favor of overruling Roe and Casey: the nature of their error, the quality of their reasoning, the “workability” of the rules they imposed on the country, their disruptive effect on other areas […]
Dobbs Sentences #227: Part III
Paragraph 7 of 8 Sentence 3 of 3 Two claims in this sentence: “Our cases have attempted to provide a framework for deciding when a precedent should be overruled, and they have identified factors that should be considered in making such a decision. Janus v. State, County, and Municipal Employees, 585 U. S. ___, ___–___ […]
Cynical Jason 