Can one of the liberal four dissent on anything?

What do the last three big Supreme Court decisions have in common?  The liberal four all voted alike.   

What about the conservative five?  They disagreed a lot among themselves.  There is nothing predictable about the five, as many of us learned last week.

On the subsidies, not one of these four liberals raised a single objection: hey, guys, shouldn't we read the law as written?  Is it really our job to rewrite what Congress wrote?  

On the marriage case, not one said this: hey guys, didn't Justice Ginsburg once said that it would have been better to leave abortion in the hands of voters?  Shouldn't we sit back and give the public a little time to figure this out across the land?  Aren't a bunch of states already discussing this?  Let's trust the people and send this one back to the states.

On the EPA, the liberal four voted together again.  The dissent by Justice Kagan could have been written by The White House:

In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said it was enough that the EPA considered costs at later stages of the process. 

"Over more than a decade, EPA took costs into account at multiple stages and through multiple means as it set emissions limits for power plants," Kagan said. 

She was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. 

This is crazy.  We have four automatic liberal votes that can't seem to dissent from the liberal gospel on anything.

You can blame Roe v. Wade for this politicization of the Court.  We used to look for judges with good temperament.  Today, everything is just too political.  It will get worse after the same marriage decision.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

What do the last three big Supreme Court decisions have in common?  The liberal four all voted alike.   

What about the conservative five?  They disagreed a lot among themselves.  There is nothing predictable about the five, as many of us learned last week.

On the subsidies, not one of these four liberals raised a single objection: hey, guys, shouldn't we read the law as written?  Is it really our job to rewrite what Congress wrote?  

On the marriage case, not one said this: hey guys, didn't Justice Ginsburg once said that it would have been better to leave abortion in the hands of voters?  Shouldn't we sit back and give the public a little time to figure this out across the land?  Aren't a bunch of states already discussing this?  Let's trust the people and send this one back to the states.

On the EPA, the liberal four voted together again.  The dissent by Justice Kagan could have been written by The White House:

In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said it was enough that the EPA considered costs at later stages of the process. 

"Over more than a decade, EPA took costs into account at multiple stages and through multiple means as it set emissions limits for power plants," Kagan said. 

She was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. 

This is crazy.  We have four automatic liberal votes that can't seem to dissent from the liberal gospel on anything.

You can blame Roe v. Wade for this politicization of the Court.  We used to look for judges with good temperament.  Today, everything is just too political.  It will get worse after the same marriage decision.

P.S. You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.