Justice Sonia Sotomayor Lashes Out at Conservative Justices, Accuses Them of Pro-Trump Bias

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is now whining that the conservatives on the court favor the President's agenda. Or at least that's what she says. What she really means is that they insist on following the US Constitution and the laws of the land. In this particular case, she is talking about SCOTUS overruling a lower court to allow President Trump to deny entrance into the country those who would wind up on the public dole.

Sotomayor blasted the conservatives on the court for lifting the injunction. The oldest law on the books, or at least one of the oldest says that you cannot come to this country if you are going to be a public charge. In other words, a leech. Democratic presidents have narrowed that definition to mean only cash payments but allows HEAP, HUD, Medicaid and food stamps which amounts much more than the cash payments would.

I find it funny that a judge who was overruled 67% the time her cases were appealed to SCOTUS would have the nerve to say she understands the law better than judges who have never been overruled before reaching the high court.

From The Blaze

In a scathing opinion written on Friday, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor accused her fellow justices of doing President Donald Trump's bidding.

Sotomayor's stinging opinion followed a 5-4 vote down ideological lines in which the high court's conservative justices granted the Trump administration an emergency stay allowing it to continue enforcing its updated "public charge" rule.

She also wrote:

Today's decision follows a now-familiar pattern. The Government seeks emergency relief from this Court, asking it to grant a stay where two lower courts have not. The Government insists—even though review in a court of appeals is imminent—that it will suffer irreparable harm if this Court does not grant a stay. And the Court yields.

Claiming one emergency after another, the Government has recently sought stays in an unprecedented number of cases, demanding immediate attention and consuming limited Court resources in each. And with each successive application, of course, its cries of urgency ring increasingly hollow.

The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author of the article and not necessarily shared or endorsed by SteadfastLoyalty.com

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.