A controversial figure in legal reporting is now relying on speculative interpretations of a justice’s demeanor rather than direct insider knowledge, raising questions about the accuracy and methodology of their coverage. Critics argue that without verified sources, the analysis risks misrepresenting proceedings based on subjective observations. The shift highlights broader concerns about transparency in judicial reporting when firsthand access is no longer available. Readers are left to weigh whether such speculative takes offer meaningful insight or merely conjecture.
Biskupic no longer has any inside information so instead she is forced to make up reporting based on the Justice's apparent body language.
