Author Topic: Thomas dissent says SCOTUS should overrule decision protecting military from tort liability  (Read 705 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TomSea

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 40,433
  • Gender: Male
  • All deserve a trial if accused
Thomas and Bader Ginsburg voted the same way on this.  I get lost on the case itself, it looks like a matter of principal but... it is interesting that those two agreed.

Quote
Thomas dissent says SCOTUS should overrule decision protecting military from tort liability
Debra Cassens Weiss

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented Monday when the high court refused to hear the case of a man whose wife died at a naval hospital because of complications from childbirth.

The petitioner, Walter Daniel, had filed a tort suit in the death of his wife, a Navy lieutenant. The lower courts had ruled that Daniel’s suit was barred by the Supreme Court case Feres v. United States. That 1950 decision had held that military personnel injured by the negligence of a federal employee cannot sue the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

In his dissent from the refusal to grant cert, Thomas said the Supreme Court should have accepted Daniel’s case to consider overruling Feres. Ginsburg did not join Thomas’ dissent.

Read more at: http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/thomas-dissent-says-supreme-court-should-overrule-decision-protecting-military-from-tort-liability

So, Ginsburg and Thomas dissented per the first paragraph but there in the 3rd, it must be a different part of the argument, it says Ginsburg did not join in the dissent.

Maybe this case was reported on here last week.