Sam Alito is a salty little bitch, and Justice Ketanji is all of us

Alito can't handle the truth, but KBJ makes him face it every day

Sam Alito knows he’s wrong. He just doesn’t want anyone to say so out loud.

And so when he and his corrupt Gang of Six rushed, in unprecedented fashion, to make his “Fuck Them Blacks” ruling go into effect immediately, rather than in the 32 days it almost always takes for a Supreme Court decision to activate, he didn’t expect to be challenged. Not least by the “uppity” manifestation of the very people whose rights he’d just taken a dump on, to help John Crow live his lifelong dream of crushing the Voting Rights Act.

And because his May 4 order gets published first, he issued a pre-emptive strike, declaring at the end of his command that those pro-Republican Louisiana maps get on the books yesterday:

The dissent in this suit levels charges that cannot go unanswered. The dissent would require that the 2026 congressional elections in Louisiana be held under a map that has been held to be unconstitutional.* The dissent does not claim that it is now too late for the state legislature or the District Court to adopt a new map that complies with the Constitution. Nor does the dissent assert that it is not feasible for the elections to be held under such a map. Instead, the dissent offers two reasons for its proposed course of action. One is trivial at best, and the other is baseless and insulting. [Emphasis added]

The first is compliance with the 32-day default rule set out in this Court’s Rule 45.3, but as the Court’s order explains, there is good reason to depart from the default rule here. The principal reason for the 32-day default rule is to give a losing party time to prepare a petition for rehearing. But here, the Robinson appellees have not expressed an intent to file such a petition, much less set out any ground on which a petition might be based. And the need for prompt action by this Court is clear. The date scheduled for the beginning of early voting in the primary election has already passed. The congressional districting map enacted by the legislature has been held to be unconstitutional, and the general election will be held in just six months.

The second reason offered by the dissent is that we should allow the 32-day period to run out in order to “avoid the appearance of partiality.” Post, at 3 (opinion of JACKSON, J.). But the dissent does not explain why its insistence on unthinking compliance with Rule 45.3’s default rule does not create the appearance of partiality (by running out the clock) on behalf of those who may find it politically advantageous to have the election occur under the unconstitutional map.

The dissent goes on to claim that our decision represent an unprincipled use of power. See post, at 4 (“And just like that, those principles give way to power”). That is a groundless and utterly irresponsible charge. What principle has the Court violated? The principle that Rule 45.3’s 32-day default period should never be shortened even when there is good reason to do so? The principle that we should never take any action that might unjustifiably be criticized as Partisan?

Yes, yes, Sam. Who needs that “unthinking compliance with the rules” crap when you can lock in your favored party’s control of the House and its nasty, dangerous gavels with which Congress might investigate trivialities like … say … corrupt gift-taking by members of the Supreme Court…

Methinks Mr. Right Wing Flags doth protest too much! He seems to know how blatantly partisan he and his flow British Royals state dinner attendees look to the rest of us, and just as he did on his “bitch to the right wing press” tour following his Dobbs abomination condemning American women to uterine chattel status, he is scowling and pouting that anyone would dare to call him out. And call him out KBJ certainly did.

And as per usual, her dissent is one for the ages. It lands with this:

These post-Callais developments have a strong political undercurrent. Louisiana’s hurried response to the Callais decision unfolds in the midst of an ongoing statewide election, against the backdrop of a pitched redistricting battle among state governments that appear to be acting as proxies for their favored political parties.2 And as always, the Court has a choice. By my count, we have granted an application to issue the judgment forthwith over a party’s objection only twice in the last 25 years. See Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, No. 21A220, 2021 WL 5931622 (Dec. 16, 2021); Order in Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, No. 13A7, etc. (June 28, 2013). To avoid the appearance of partiality here, we could, as per usual, opt to stay on the sidelines and take no position by applying our default procedures.

But, today, the Court chooses the opposite. Not content to have decided the law, it now takes steps to influence its implementation. [Emphasis added] The Court’s decision to buck our usual practice under Rule 45.3 and issue the judgment forthwith is tantamount to an approval of Louisiana’s rush to pause the ongoing election in order to pass a new map.3

And make no mistake: That course of action does not follow from the Callais decision itself. The question whether our decision should affect the map to be used in the ongoing primaries raises a host of legal and political questions that are entirely independent of the issue in Callais. Among the legal ones, there is the Court’s previous insistence that — even at the cost of letting partisan gamesmanship corrupt our democracy, see Rucho v. Common Cause, 588 U. S. 684,721 (2019) (KAGAN, J., dissenting)—courts should not “ ‘risk assuming political . . . responsibility for a [partisan map-drawing] process that often produces ill will and distrust,’ ” id., at 704 (majority opinion). There is also the so-called Purcell principle, which we invoked only five months ago to chide a federal district court for “improperly insert[ing] itself into an active primary campaign.” Abbott v. League of United Latin American Citizens, 607 U. S. ___, ___ (2025) (per curiam) (slip op., at 2).

The Court unshackles itself from both constraints today and dives into the fray. And just like that, those principles give way to power. Because this abandon is unwarranted and unwise, respectfully, I dissent.

Good sis is a better woman than me for including the word “respectfully.”

Coming up this week:

Catch me on I’ve Had It with Jennifer and Pumps, which I’m taping Tuesday, and with THE LEFT HOOK with Wajahat Ali Tuesday at 1 p.m. for our weekly “piss off the right wing” LIVE.

And if you’d like to help us get to 500,000 Subscribers on YouTube, please click here and hit SUBSCRIBE! It’s fast and free, and do share the link with a friend or three!

And why not subscribe here on Substack as well? Here’s how to do that. My team and I appreciate your support for our independent media journey. Let’s keep fighting these bastards until we win.

With love and respect to the Queen Taraji.

And if you’d like to join us at our The Joy Reid Show live, featuring special guest Godfrey, on June 11, click here to get your tickets while they last!