Trump’s Supreme Court Appointees Take Opposite Sides In Two Cases

FEBRUARY 5, 2019 - WASHINGTON, DC: Supreme Court  Neil Gorsuch, left, and Brett Kavanaugh at the Capitol in Washington, DC on February 5, 2019. (Doug Mills/The New York Times POOL PHOTO) NYTSOTU
WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 5: Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh attend the State of the Union address in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives at the U.S. Capitol Building on February ... WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 5: Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh attend the State of the Union address in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives at the U.S. Capitol Building on February 5, 2019 in Washington, DC. President Trump's second State of the Union address was postponed one week due to the partial government shutdown. (Photo by Doug Mills-Pool/Getty Images) MORE LESS

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s two Supreme Court appointees were on opposite sides of two of three cases that the justices decided Tuesday.

The two new justices have solidified conservative control of the Supreme Court, but they do not march in lockstep, at least in the small corners of the court’s work dealing with Indian treaties and maritime law.

In one case, Justice Neil Gorsuch joined the court’s liberal justices in ruling that a Washington state Indian tribe doesn’t have to pay a state fuel tax. Gorsuch said an 1855 treaty makes a “handful of modest promises” to the Yakama Nation, including the right to move goods to market freely.

Holding the parties to the terms of the treaty that ceded 10 million acres to the United States “is the least we can do.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh dissented, arguing that the treaty merely gives tribal members the same right to travel as everyone else.

The other case involved a lawsuit by survivors of two Navy veterans over their exposure to asbestos. Kavanaugh wrote the court’s opinion that allows the suit against manufacturers of equipment used on Navy ships to continue. Kavanaugh wrote that the makers of pumps, turbines and blowers that required asbestos insulation to operate properly should have warned about the health dangers of asbestos exposure. This is so, Kavanaugh wrote, even though the companies did not manufacture or sell the asbestos to the Navy.

Gorsuch dissented. The manufacturers “are at risk of being held responsible retrospectively for failing to warn about other people’s products,” Gorsuch wrote.

The liberal justices and Chief Justice John Roberts also were in the majority. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas joined Gorsuch’s dissent.

The lineup in the Indian treaty case was even more interesting. Gorsuch’s opinion was joined only by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the leader of the court’s liberal wing. The other three liberal justices voted for the same outcome, but with different reasoning.

Trump nominated Gorsuch in 2017 to fill the seat Senate Republicans held open for more than a year following Justice Antonin Scalia’s death in 2016. The Senate refused to act on President Barack Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland.

Kavanaugh joined the court in October, following tumultuous hearings that included an allegation that he sexually assaulted a woman as a teenager. Kavanaugh denied the allegation. Kavanaugh replaced Justice Anthony Kennedy, who retired.

Tuesday’s other case demonstrated the more common alliance of the conservative justices. In a case involving immigrants, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were with the other three conservatives in ruling that the Trump administration has the authority to detain people who have finished serving criminal sentences while it decides whether to deport them.

The four liberal justices dissented.

Dear Reader,

When we asked recently what makes TPM different from other outlets, readers cited factors like honesty, curiosity, transparency, and our vibrant community. They also pointed to our ability to report on important stories and trends long before they are picked up by mainstream outlets; our ability to contextualize information within the arc of history; and our focus on the real-world consequences of the news.

Our unique approach to reporting and presenting the news, however, wouldn’t be possible without our readers’ support. That’s not just marketing speak, it’s true: our work would literally not be possible without readers deciding to become members. Not only does member support account for more than 80% of TPM’s revenue, our members have helped us build an engaged and informed community. Many of our best stories were born from reader tips and valuable member feedback.

We do what other news outlets can’t or won’t do because our members’ support gives us real independence.

If you enjoy reading TPM and value what we do, become a member today.

TPM Staff
Latest News
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Investigations Desk:
Director of Audience:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: