[cardcrimson]

As a matter of the legal issue in this case, portions of the majority opinion are comically disingenuous, even if the ultimate holding under the law isn't necessarily wrong (though it's close):

Thanks for setting the record straight, counselor. Boy, those judges in the original court and on the Court of Appeals sure must be morons. . . .

That's not what 2006alum said; he called portions of the opinion "comically disingenuous", not stupid.  And whatever you think of the opinion as a whole, it is hard not to find the passage cited by 2006alum to be a stretch.

BC

I thought the Cardboard was a non political space. Why openly ridicule the opinion, then mention the judges were Bush and Trump appointees?

Frankly, I find the entire suit to be a stretch. A violation of Title IX? Seriously? A complete waste of taxpayer dollars and I hope the defendant was awarded legal fees for the frivolous action.

[cardcrimson]

As a matter of the legal issue in this case, portions of the majority opinion are comically disingenuous, even if the ultimate holding under the law isn't necessarily wrong (though it's close):

Thanks for setting the record straight, counselor. Boy, those judges in the original court and on the Court of Appeals sure must be morons. . . .

That's not what 2006alum said; he called portions of the opinion "comically disingenuous", not stupid.  And whatever you think of the opinion as a whole, it is hard not to find the passage cited by 2006alum to be a stretch.

BC

I thought the Cardboard was a non political space. Why openly ridicule the opinion, then mention the judges were Bush and Trump appointees?

Frankly, I find the entire suit to be a stretch. A violation of Title IX? Seriously? A complete waste of taxpayer dollars and I hope the defendant was awarded legal fees for the frivolous action.