re: SCOTUS poised to overturn ruling that declares homeless encampments a legal right

I don’t always trust questions and comments made by justices. Sometimes they are about pushing the side they support to make a better argument, and also sometimes it is to appear objective when mind already made up in opposite direction. There have been cases with the liberal justices appeared to be challenging the liberal side of a case only to fully fall in line with the left/liberal side like it was beyond questioning with the actual decision/opinion written.

It is also much easier to pick liberal activist judges who will stay left than it is to pick conservative ones that will stay conservative. All 3 of Trump’s picks have made some strange votes/decisions in some cases including Gorsuch’s written opinion that redefined the long standing legal definition of “sex” in Title 7 under Civil Rights Act not only to include transgenders therefore basically ignoring the longstanding biological sex definition including reason the term was added late in process but also to include sexuality.

quote:

---

An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids. Those who adopted the Civil Rights Act might not have anticipated their work would lead to this particular result. But the limits of the drafters' imagination supply no reason to ignore the law's demands. Only the written word is the law, and all persons are entitled to its benefit.

---