MAGA is fighting back against the mob and so are we… but we need your help. Join our growing army and click here to subscribe to Revolver. Or give the gift of Revolver—simply select the annual subscription and select “This is a gift” on the next page. If you want to give extra during this critical time, you can make a one-time or recurring monthly donation — whether it’s $1 or $1,000, every bit goes towards the battle to save our great nation.
Justice Jackson, whether fairly or unfairly, has now been labeled as the Supreme Court’s “affirmative action” appointment, and she’s dealing with a lot of public embarrassment right now. This follows a situation where her personally hand-picked clerks managed to dupe her, prompting shock and horror across the country. Recently, the satire site The Babylon Bee took a funny shot at Justice Jackson with this blistering headline.
Awkward: Supreme Court Rules Against Affirmative Action With Affirmative Action Hire Sitting Right There https://t.co/ooao4eqVyc pic.twitter.com/NU2mHkpXRz
— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) June 29, 2023
Justice Jackson’s clerks really dropped the ball. Apparently, they didn’t do their homework and let her run with a mathematically incorrect claim from a third-party brief. It’s hard to imagine that a Supreme Court justice could screw up this badly, parroting something so obviously off. To buy into such a glaringly false stat, you’d have to be seriously out of touch with reality, or an affirmative action appointee who shouldn’t be on the court in the first place. The whole fuss boils down to a dodgy claim that affirmative action docs somehow double the survival odds for black infants. Check out this tweet thread from October 2022 that artfully picks apart this false study.
Saw this in @SCOTUSblog. Wait, what? Affirmative action doctors *double* the chances of black infant survival?!? pic.twitter.com/mMKB58vJey
— (((tedfrank))) (@tedfrank) October 30, 2022
Here’s a closeup of the image:
The lawyers who cited this study were either lying, or mathematically challenged.
The lawyers are lying (or, more likely, mathematically illiterate). The study says no such thing.
The study purports to find black-doctor/black-infant have survival rate of 99.8% vs. 99.6% for white-doctor/black-infant. https://t.co/USWCS1p65b
— (((tedfrank))) (@tedfrank) October 30, 2022
From beginning to end, the study was a jumbled mess.
So the study is confusing correlation with causation: if you have a black doctor, your baby is more likely to survive, but that’s because that means you’re less likely to be in the NICU, where there are fewer black doctors. It has nothing to do with the race of the doctor.
— (((tedfrank))) (@tedfrank) October 30, 2022
More:
I read the wrong chart, in part because the study’s meaningful data is in an appendix. The difference is 99.96% vs 99.91%. And the difference isn’t even statistically significant. https://t.co/nEAsaWugbW
— (((tedfrank))) (@tedfrank) October 31, 2022
There’s even a whole podcast taking apart the nonsensical claim:
This study was eviscerated by @VPrasadMDMPH on one of his podcasts – reflects the publishing bias in this area:https://t.co/Er131YghdD
— Sudarshan Rajagopal (@SudarRajagopal) October 31, 2022
Interestingly, it was this inaccurate study that Justice Jackson’s clerks used in her dissent. That move has led to a considerable degree of embarrassment for the justice. Why didn’t she catch it?
Justice Jackson’s clerks let her down for failing to citecheck: she parrots a mathematically incorrect claim from an amicus brief. I refuted it in detail when the brief was released in this October thread.
Already, MSM sources are repeating the slander. https://t.co/iVcTaMzepH pic.twitter.com/YpzwuCiyer
— (((tedfrank))) (@tedfrank) June 29, 2023
Regarding that strange dissent, some folks are saying it reads like it was scribbled down by a high schooler the night before it was due. Ouch.
Wait, is this a high school history paper the kid wrote the night before, or a Supreme Court dissent pic.twitter.com/sIxTgSYTwQ
— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) June 30, 2023
Here’s a closeup of the image:
Well, at least Ketanji has this going for her: she will always be smarter than Sotomayor…
SUPPORT REVOLVER — DONATE — SUBSCRIBE — NEWSFEED — GAB — GETTR — TRUTH SOCIAL — TWITTER
Join the Discussion