To borrow a phrase, the import of the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision preserving access to an abortion pill is a “tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Handed down amidst the tempest over Justice Alito’s wife Martha-Ann’s habit of flying politically loaded flags at their houses while he rules on politically loaded cases, and further revelations of Justice Thomas friends-with-hundreds-of-thousands-of-dollars-worth-of-benefits relationship to billionaire conservative Harlan Crow, the case could be seen as an attempt to show the high court can still act with unity even on so-called “liberal causes.”

One could even speculate that Chief Justice Roberts managed to persuade his charges to throw a bone to the left in preparation for a yet-to-come decision on Trump’s plea for Presidential immunity that will at the very least punt any possibility that Special Counsel Jack Smith can try the Jan 6 case before the 2024 election.

But the reality of the ruling in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine is quite different.

On its face, Justice Brett Kavanaugh appeared to revert to a more traditional approach of deciding cases on narrow grounds. Such a style avoids making big decisions whenever possible under the theory that it’s better for jurisprudential health to choose carefully from a buffet of legal choices rather than ravenously consume everything in sight.

Showing off the vigor of a more youthful style of writing,........

© The Daily Beast