Oklahoma v Castro-Huerta is a ruling in favor of the state

[Greedo punched first]

Kavanaugh likely writes a decision in favor of Oklahoma.

[Dereich]

Kavanaugh likely writes a decision in favor of Oklahoma.

Nothing in your link indicates that this is the case.

[Greedo punched first]

Kavanaugh is the only one who hasn’t written anything from the April sitting.

[Dereich]

Kavanaugh is the only one who hasn’t written anything from the April sitting.

So? Its not like its a rule that they should be spaced out among justices. Plus there are plenty of other big cases remaining that he could get over an April one; I think he might get the EPA case if they don't want to let Gorsuch end Chevron deference. Plus, even if they did want to give him something from April, Biden v. Texas is still available too.

[Greedo punched first]

Kavanaugh is the only one who hasn’t written anything from the April sitting.

So? Its not like its a rule that they should be spaced out among justices. Plus there are plenty of other big cases remaining that he could get over an April one; I think he might get the EPA case if they don't want to let Gorsuch end Chevron deference. Plus, even if they did want to give him something from April, Biden v. Texas is still available too.

If Biden wins Biden v Texas, I imagine the opinion is a per curiam dismissal of Texas' lawsuit. That would make the opinions for the April sitting even.

[Skill and Chance]

Agreed.  I just don't see where Gorsuch finds a 5th vote for expansive pro-tribe interpretations of Indian law anymore.  Maybe Thomas depending on the technicalities of the individual cases, but that's unlikely.   

[Donerail]

Agreed.  I just don't see where Gorsuch finds a 5th vote for expansive pro-tribe interpretations of Indian law anymore.  Maybe Thomas depending on the technicalities of the individual cases, but that's unlikely.   

Barrett, if Ysleta is any indication.

[Skill and Chance]

Agreed.  I just don't see where Gorsuch finds a 5th vote for expansive pro-tribe interpretations of Indian law anymore.  Maybe Thomas depending on the technicalities of the individual cases, but that's unlikely.   

Barrett, if Ysleta is any indication.

Oh, wow, didn't know about that one.  If she is generally on board with Gorsuch for expansive tribal rights, that is a game-changer!

[Greedo punched first]

Roberts and/or Kavanaugh was in the majority of Sharp v Murphy, which was 6-2 or 5-3. Might Castro-Huerta get at least one of them as a fifth vote.

[Skill and Chance]

Roberts and/or Kavanaugh was in the majority of Sharp v Murphy, which was 6-2 or 5-3. Might Castro-Huerta get at least one of them as a fifth vote.

I think all that meant was they were honoring the precedent from the other case, McGirt?  It is not at all  surprising that Roberts and Kavanaugh would vote to recognize a precedent they originally dissented from. 
 

[Greedo punched first]

It’s Kavanaugh in favor of Oklahoma.

[politicallefty]

It’s Kavanaugh.

Indeed it is. Gorsuch writes the dissent, joined by the liberals.

What an awful decision.

[Greedo punched first]

I knew it.

[If my soul was made of stone]

"Abortions for some, miniature Cherokee Nation flags for others" –Neil Gorsuch