As Twitchy reported earlier, Chief Justice John Roberts once again disproved that “6-3 conservative majority” claim by dissenting in the 5-4 SCOTUS ruling that California must allow prayer meetings in private residences. Also dissenting was Justice Elena Kagen, but we find this excerpt from her dissent difficult to believe. This can’t be real, can it?
Justice Kagan, dissenting: "The law
does not require that the state equally treat apples and watermelons."— Adam Liptak (@adamliptak) April 10, 2021
What?
Brilliant analysis
— Dr. 10% FOR THE BIG GUY (@enp1980) April 10, 2021
Was it written in crayon???
— Nick Easter (@nickeaster19) April 10, 2021
Recommended
That’s horrible logic.
— Bill Allison (@CoachA60) April 10, 2021
Attention @BadLegalTakes.
That’s actually part of her opinion?? Lmao
— board man (@robertstoner19) April 10, 2021
Yeah what the hell kind of opinion is that
— Brandon (@brandon028484) April 10, 2021
…but the law does require you read the Constitution.
— BAKing (@BAKing87432611) April 10, 2021
It literally requires that we treat religion much much better https://t.co/lgFyaJ0dE7
— Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) April 10, 2021
Justice Kagan can go f*ck herself with both apples and watermelons for all I care.
— The Ghost of Reason Past (@Reasons_Ghost) April 10, 2021
Since when did separate but equal become an approved idea in judicial circles again?
— Tyler Boliver (@TylerBoliver) April 10, 2021
Yeah, we can just ignore that pesky equal protection clause in the Constitution.
— James G (@dajamTX) April 10, 2021
But it does require that the law protect freedom of religion.
— Justin (@JPal319) April 10, 2021
What are the apples and watermelons? This is so confusing.
— TexasPediDoc (@babydocwhit) April 10, 2021
Low IQ dissent
— devilsbrigade (@devilsbrigade42) April 10, 2021
God she is really terrible at her job
— Braden (@Braden4198) April 10, 2021
There’s some high brow legal reasoning right there.
— Tina Davis (@TinaDav65305167) April 10, 2021
Kagan clearly has a cantaloupe for a brain.
— AFiscal Hawk (@AFiscalHawk) April 10, 2021
What the hell does that even mean?
— Chris Arrr (@capitalistpeeg) April 10, 2021
She’s nuts
— Black/Proud/Conservative … ??????/ ? (@UoKnowsBest) April 10, 2021
Kagan is dumber than a doorknob.
— Lee Harle (@llharle) April 10, 2021
She’s a national embarrassment
— Doctor Dutch Seuss (@14_dutch) April 10, 2021
Where are these useless justices coming from?
— Ancient Upstairs Cinnamon (@FlukeSeminal) April 10, 2021
She was a prolific pick by O. She almost always rules anti-constitutional. He knew he didn’t have to worry about her ironclad leftism.
— ken yarnes (@drmkry) April 10, 2021
Huh? That’s a legal argument? She’s absolutely wrong. Equal justice under the law.
— Ruth Hill (@rhill22733) April 10, 2021
Madam, we are not fruit, we are human beings, equal in the eyes of the law. If you see yourself somehow above the rest of us, we have found a fundamental flaw within YOU.
— Seudónimo (@KeithBowie21) April 10, 2021
It’s a good thing she has such a compelling life story, because as a SCJustice, she’s a complete dumbass.
— GrampyRick ?? (@Grampy_Rick) April 10, 2021
The virus doesn’t distinguish between apples and watermelons, so the law shouldn’t either. Kagan is stupid.
— Kathryn Beank511⚔️ (@BeanK511) April 10, 2021
One day after Biden tells the Nation constitutional amendments are simply guidelines to be consulted, but not adhered to.
— ReporterMcCabe (@NeilWMcCabe2) April 10, 2021
Kagan as uninspiring as always
— Winston Churchill (@DblethnkWinston) April 10, 2021
So glad we have such an intellectual giant on the High Court. ?
— Dawn Marie ??✝ (@learning2fly6) April 10, 2021
Bonus:
https://t.co/pWtF3YHHpY pic.twitter.com/s8FA4BLHrc
— McMurphy Memes (@mcmurphy_pat) April 10, 2021
Related:
Slate writer says SCOTUS justices have established a ‘new’ First Amendment rule that accommodates churches and religious activity https://t.co/DaeEa13p5b
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) April 10, 2021
