If you happen to had been following the Supreme Courtroom information yesterday, you probably noticed that Justice Amy Coney Barrett smacked down her fellow Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson over her infantile dissent, saying:
“We is not going to dwell on Justice Jackson’s argument, which is at odds with greater than two centuries’ value of precedent, to not point out the Structure itself,” she started. “We observe solely this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial govt whereas embracing an imperial judiciary,” she added.
Now one other excerpt from Jackson’s dissent is circulating and it incorporates a phrase that makes Jackson sound extra like a YouTuber than a Supreme Courtroom justice.
She truly used the expression ‘await it’ in the course of a sentence.
See under:
First time I’ve seen the phrase, “Watch for it” in a SCOTUS ruling.
What’s she writing, a judicial dissent, or an article for MSNBC? pic.twitter.com/FO3yQZwSHb
— ArthurinCali (@ArthurReturnss) June 27, 2025
Simply wonderful.
It is one factor to have an intellectually unimpressive Supreme Courtroom Justice. Nevertheless it’s considerably stunning how unintelligent her clerks look like as effectively.
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) June 27, 2025
A lot of folks commented on this on Twitter/X:
The phrase “Watch for it” provides off a Tik Tok vibe fully unsuited for a SCOTUS opinion. I can think about her clerking employees encouraging its inclusion, although.
— ArthurinCali (@ArthurReturnss) June 27, 2025
“One of many sharpest authorized minds in a era”
-Biden, remarking on Justice Jackson
— ArthurinCali (@ArthurReturnss) June 27, 2025
We’re all Amy Coney Barrett at present. Good God, how did this individual ever make it to the Supreme Courtroom. https://t.co/AT01q1joyY
— Ken Gardner (@KenGardner11) June 27, 2025
Because it seems . . . (await it) . . . the American folks perceive {that a} “girl” is an grownup feminine individual.
Full cease.
IYKYK. Looks like there have been warning indicators. ♂️ https://t.co/mtAIWorFpf
— Gene Hamilton (@GeneHamiltonUSA) June 27, 2025
We’re reaping the fruit of GenZ SCOTUS clerks being educated their entire lives to put in writing for clicks. https://t.co/Gvcv5VmX1v
— Rachel Bovard (@rachelbovard) June 27, 2025
Is there any surprise why Barrett and the opposite justices didn’t take Jackson’s dissent critically? Even she didn’t appear to.
