re: #686 Walter L. Newton

But, if this woman is possibly going to be on the SC, it is interesting to see how many of her decisions were reversed by the SAME court she may be serving on.

Granted, not every one of her decisions have been reviewed by the SC, but the ones that made it that far, made it that far because someone thought that the original decision was wrong, and that a higher court needed to examine the outcome.

And in a good amount of the cases, she was reversed. That would make me think twice about her fairness and judicial smarts.

It’s also interesting to look at who dissented from those reversals — in almost all cases, the dissenters were the liberal justices. Which strongly suggests that the reversals were politically motivated. The Health Insurance case is the only one in which the dissenters included conservative justices, which suggests that it was NOT reversed, as the first citation says. The second (more detailed) description which says it was not reversed is probably the correct one.