This is already making the rounds. Conservatives are alleging that, in today’s ruling, all nine Supreme Court justices have disputed the reasoning of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals–and therefore of Sonia Sotomayor herself–in the Ricci case. See here and here.
But where did they come up with such a claim? It turns out they’re citing the 10th footnote in Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion, which reads “The lower courts focused on respondents’ “intent” rather than on whether respondents in fact had good cause to act. See 554 F. Supp. 2d 142, 157 (Conn. 2006). Ordinarily, a remand for fresh consideration would be in order. But the Court has seen fit to preclude further proceedings. I therefore explain why, if final adjudication by this Court is indeed appropriate, New Haven should be the prevailing party.”
Ergo, Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Stevens, and Souter all think Sotomayor is unfit to serve on the Supreme Court. Or something.
