Experts: Cannon issued "first court decision of Project 2025" -- but it may be "blessing in disguise"
- Bias Rating
10% Center
- Reliability
75% ReliableGood
- Policy Leaning
10% Center
- Politician Portrayal
-55% Negative
Continue For Free
Create your free account to see the in-depth bias analytics and more.
Continue
Continue
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy, and subscribe to email updates. Already a member: Log inBias Score Analysis
The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Sentiments
36% Positive
- Conservative
Sentence | Sentiment | Bias |
---|---|---|
Unlock this feature by upgrading to the Pro plan. |
Reliability Score Analysis
Policy Leaning Analysis
Politician Portrayal Analysis
Bias Meter
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Contributing sentiments towards policy:
49% : "It's more useful and illuminating to think of the dismissal as the first court decision of Project 2025, in which the rule of law takes an unabashed back seat to the preeminent principle of loyalty to Trump," Litman wrote, referring to the Heritage Foundation's far-right plan for a second Trump administration.40% : Yesterday, though, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, appointed by Trump in 2020, ruled the opposite: that the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith, who filed charges against the former president for hoarding state secrets at Mar-a-Lago, was a clear and direct violation of the country's founding document -- indeed, a "substantial separation-of-powers violation."
23% : But while Cannon cited a recent opinion issued by conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, many legal experts accused her of ignoring decades of legal precedent to dismiss a case that she was accused of intentionally delaying for more than a year, ensuring that Trump would never stand trial in a case widely considered the strongest against him.
*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.