Kate Shaw

Kate Shaw is a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, where she teaches constitutional law, administrative law and other courses. She writes about the presidency, the law of democracy, the Supreme Court and reproductive rights and justice. She's also a contributor at ABC News and co-hosts the Supreme Court podcast

Biography:  https://www.nytimes.com/column/kate-shaw

80%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermines the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
Analysis.OverallConflictOfInterestScore * 0.3F + Analysis.OverallBiasScore * 0.3F + Analysis.DeceptivenessScore * 0.3F + Analysis.ReadabilityScore * 0.1F

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

The Daily's Verdict

This author has a mixed reputation for journalistic standards. It is advisable to fact-check, scrutinize for bias, and check for conflicts of interest before relying on the author's reporting.

Bias

85%

Examples:

  • It will rightly be understood as enormously increasing the power and enormously reducing the accountability of the president.
  • The court had already given Mr. Trump a decisive win in the form of its monthslong delay in deciding this case, but the opinion itself grants Mr. Trump a more enduring win, and democracy an even more enduring loss.
  • The Supreme Court Creates a Lawless Presidency

Conflicts of Interest

100%

Examples:

  • The court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overruled the 40-year-old Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, won’t affect Americans’ lives in as stark and immediate a way as the 2022 decision overruling Roe v. Wade.
  • The Supreme Court has now decreed that it, rather than agencies staffed by individuals with deep subject matter expertise and answerable to presidential appointees, will be the final arbiter of the meaning of every statute passed by Congress.

Contradictions

85%

Examples:

  • The Supreme Court’s radical decision handing the president broad immunity from criminal prosecution on Monday will rightly be understood as enormously increasing the power and enormously reducing the accountability of the president.

Deceptions

60%

Examples:

  • But like Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Loper Bright has the potential to fundamentally transform major aspects of the health, safety and well-being of most Americans.
  • The court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overruled the 40-year-old Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, won’t affect Americans’ lives in as stark and immediate a way as the 2022 decision overruling Roe v. Wade.
  • The Supreme Court has now decreed that it, rather than agencies staffed by individuals with deep subject matter expertise and answerable to presidential appointees, will be the final arbiter of the meaning of every statute passed by Congress.

Recent Articles

Supreme Court Ruling: Former Presidents Protected from Prosecution During Office, Implications for Trump and Biden

Supreme Court Ruling: Former Presidents Protected from Prosecution During Office, Implications for Trump and Biden

Broke On: Monday, 01 July 2024 The US Supreme Court ruled that former presidents have significant protection from prosecution for their official acts while in office, potentially shielding Donald Trump from criminal charges. The decision sparked intense debate and raised questions about presidential powers and the balance of power in the US government. Joe Biden pledged to respect the ruling but accused Trump of assaulting democracy. Legal experts weigh in on the implications, with some arguing it sets a dangerous precedent.
Supreme Court Overturns Chevron Deference: Implications for Environmental Protection, Consumer Safety, and More

Supreme Court Overturns Chevron Deference: Implications for Environmental Protection, Consumer Safety, and More

Broke On: Friday, 28 June 2024 The Supreme Court has overturned the Chevron deference, a long-standing precedent that granted federal agencies broad authority to interpret and enforce laws. This decision, which weakens the role of agencies like the EPA and SEC, has been met with mixed reactions. Critics argue it strengthens judicial restraint while opponents decry it as a blow to administrative agencies' ability to effectively enforce laws.