The Supreme Court is doing something out of character: Obeying precedents

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

47% : Yet it's hard to miss the fact that, after a term when the Court repeatedly indulged its most reactionary excesses -- overruling Roe, abandoning a seminal precedent separating church and state, and giving itself an unchecked veto power over environmental regulations -- the justices have now handed down three decisions in the last two weeks that proclaim the need to follow precedent and that reject arguments that have persuaded conservative judges in the past.
43% : And it's still a bad idea to bet that the Court will reaffirm its past decisions permitting affirmative action in university admissions, when two cases challenging affirmative action are decided in the coming weeks.
41% : Indeed, this lawsuit may not have been taken seriously if Texas's attorney general hadn't filed a similar suit, and if these cases were not heard by Reed O'Connor, a former Republican Capitol Hill staffer best known for his failed effort to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act.

*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.