A Sharp Dissent

Yesterday, the Court announced its opinion in the case of Genesis Health Care v. Symczyk. In a 5-4 decision, the Court held that if a plaintiff's individual claim becomes moot before a collective action is certified in a Fair Labor Standard Act case, the whole case is moot. But the Court assumed, without deciding, that the plaintiff's claim in fact was moot. In a remarkably conversational dissent, Justice Kagan asks, "But what if that premise is bogus?" She goes on to explain that the plaintiff's claim in this case was not in fact moot, making the majority opinion "the most one-off of one-offs" and "fit for nothing," and she argues that the majority is "wrong, wrong, and wrong again." Could Justice Kagan be vying to rival Justice Scalia in the quotability and sharpness of her dissents?