Hot Air Article RatingBREAKING: SCOTUS unanimously yanks chain on EPA in Waters of the US case
- Bias Rating
32% Medium Conservative
- Reliability
65% ReliableFair
- Policy Leaning
38% Medium Conservative
- Politician Portrayal
40% Negative
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Continue For Free
Create your free account to see the in-depth bias analytics and more.
Continue
Continue
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy, and subscribe to email updates. Already a member: Log inBias Score Analysis
The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Sentiments
N/A
- Conservative
| Sentence | Sentiment | Bias |
|---|---|---|
| "In an opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito in the case known as Sackett v. EPA, the high court found that the agency's interpretation of the wetlands covered under the Clean Water Act is inconsistent with the law's text and structure, and the law extends only to wetlands with a continuous surface coection to bodies of water that are 'waters of the United States' in their own right." | Negative | -10% Liberal |
| "Anyone want to take bets on the life expectancy of the Chevron doctrine after today's unanimous decision on Sackett v EPA?" | Negative | -12% Liberal |
| "Regulation of land and water use lies at the core of traditional state authority." | Negative | -24% Liberal |
Bias Meter
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Contributing sentiments towards policy:
45% : In an opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito in the case known as Sackett v. EPA, the high court found that the agency's interpretation of the wetlands covered under the Clean Water Act is "inconsistent" with the law's text and structure, and the law extends only to "wetlands with a continuous surface connection to bodies of water that are 'waters of the United States' in their own right."44% : Anyone want to take bets on the life expectancy of the Chevron doctrine after today's unanimous decision on Sackett v EPA?
38% : Regulation of land and water use lies at the core of traditional state authority.
*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.