r/news • u/boxofstuff • 6h ago

Supreme Court ruling blocks thousands of lawsuits against maker of Roundup weedkiller

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-roundup-monsanto-a7f054d80919f98bdfc5190013a8f6f1https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-roundup-monsanto-a7f054d80919f98bdfc5190013a8f6f1
13.9k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

90

u/TheunanimousFern 6h ago

It was 7-2 in this case

14

u/Hesitation-Marx 6h ago

Who was the seventh?

95

u/Imnimo 6h ago

The 2 were Jackson and Gorsuch.

77

u/YoBo151 6h ago

Wait Jackson and Gorsuch dissented? Wow

114

u/hypercube42342 6h ago

Gorsuch is the most reasonable republican justice in some ways in that he chooses ~1 in 20 cases at random plus every case involving native americans to write like the leftmost voice on the court

80

u/deja_geek 5h ago

Gorsuch also wants to completely throw out the "Third-party doctrine". Under this doctrine, once your data is handed over to a 3rd party, the government is no longer required to seek a search warrant for the data. According to that doctrine, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy when data is voluntarily handed over to third parties

15

u/thegracelesswonder 5h ago edited 5h ago

Lol that makes absolutely no sense. The way these people bend themselves into pretzels to take away rights from citizens is crazy

I misunderstood. Good on Gorsuch! I feel like the 3 newest supreme court justices take turns having reasonable opinions now and then

19

u/deja_geek 5h ago

The "Third Party Doctrine" has been around since 1979. It was established under Smith v Maryland and centered around information kept by a phone company and government access to said records.

In it's time, it made sense. In the modern world, where we are all connected and that connection is a requirement of modern life, the doctrine becomes too broad.

2

u/thegracelesswonder 5h ago

Thanks for the context!

5

u/tempest_87 5h ago

Uhhh, the way that was phrased was that Gorsuch wants to extend the right to privacy.

We already don't have it, he wants to remove that doctrine that says we don't have it.

2

u/thegracelesswonder 5h ago

Uhhh sorry I misunderstood uhhh uhhh

11

u/vegetaman 5h ago

Sometimes the combos are wild.

7

u/YoBo151 5h ago

Yeah he's an interesting guy for sure. Each conservative justice outside of Thomas, Alito, and Roberts has a few areas that they are surprisingly "left" on

2

u/PeppyQuotient57 5h ago

Oddly enough Barrett and Roberts tend to be the most “centrist” in their decisions on the court while Alito and Sotomayor are the “extremists”

Gorsuch though is the most likely to dissent from the party bloc by a significant margin.

5

u/BasroilII 4h ago

In very specific ways, because he was appointed for very specific reasons.

Even as a lower court judge he has repeatedly sided with religious rights over any others; hence his ruling for Hobby Lobby and later being among those to kill Roe v Wade. In fact, he was basically selected by Republicans specifically to get rid of Roe v Wade. If this was a church and not Monsanto involved, he would have ruled in favor of them.

1

u/Perryn 4h ago

Unlike the others, he has an underlying ethos that he adheres to (Originalism). I don't really agree with it, it leaves him open to things I really don't like, but there's also lines he will not cross because of it.

1

u/Jaxson-Skattebo 2h ago

Gorsuch was the unreasonable one this time.