SCOTUS Accused of Zig-Zagging to Preferred Outcomes

Critics slam the Supreme Court for zig-zagging through legal doctrines to hit their preferred outcomes, eroding trust in impartial justice. In cases like the tariffs ruling, justices unleash a barrage of separate opinions - seven in one - with Roberts slapping down Kavanaugh, Barrett calling out Gorsuch's "judicial flex," and Kagan firing back on major questions doctrine, leaving lawyers and lower courts lost in the chaos. Read more about this...