'Rights for me, not for thee': Justices Alito and Thomas slammed for hypocrisy in rulings
Raw StoryJustices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas have again tipped their hands and shown that ideology guides their Supreme Court judgments more than legal philosophy, according to a report. The conservative jurists issued conflicting decisions last week in a pair of cases involving parental rights and gender identity, offering contradictory analyses that Slate columnist Hila Keren said "reveal a position of parental rights for me but not for thee." "And if Alito and Thomas are so convinced that courts should hear those parents, why do they sound so eager to allow Tennessee to override parents’ support of their children’s gender identity?" Keren argued that Alito failed to show even minimal commitment to consistency and impartiality in his decisions on the two cases, although she was heartened that three other conservatives — Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett — refused to consider the premature concerns of parents of children who had not suffered any harm, and she was confused by Brett Kavanaugh's position on the cases. "His willingness to hear conservative parents in Eau Claire matches his interest in Tennessee’s response in Skrmetti to the argument that the state should have deferred to parents on medical care issues," Keren wrote.