Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Dems Gone ‘Rogue’ on SCOTUS
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, with the concurrence of much of the Left, believes our democracy is once again under attack, this time from our own “rogue” Supreme Court. MSNBC agreed that “the Supreme Court has gone rogue.” The Congressional Progressive Caucus insists “we must hold these rogue justices to account.”
It goes beyond coordinated hysterical rhetoric. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez demanded that Democratic Party leaders share their plans for “solving the problem of the rogue court.” The New York Times advised “the Constitution provides a number of paths by which Congress can restrain and discipline a rogue court.” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse introduced the Supreme Court Review Act to “check the court’s rogue decisions.”
Not only is the court rogue, but so are the six justices who normally form the majority. According to protesters at a recent anti-court rally, Roberts is an “impotent fool,” Kavanaugh a “drunken rapist” and Thomas a “traitor and perv.”
“Strong women scare” Alito; Gorsuch “stole his seat.” Barrett is in “an actual cult.”
Scholars like Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky write that none of the justices should be there. Georgia State Law professor Eric Segall argues that the Court’s illegitimate rulings should just be ignored.
But what rulings from this last term were radical, extra-legal interpretations of the Constitution? Here are some of the purportedly rogue rulings:
- an administrative agency must have congressional authority to make far-reaching decisions
- if states subsidize students in private schools, they can’t exclude religious schools
- since the constitution is silent on abortion regulation, per the 10th Amendment, states retain the authority
- the Second Amendment actually prescribes the right to bear arms.
Reasonable people can disagree with these as policy prescriptions. However, the rulings are hardly constitutionally outrageous by any standard. They are not even that politically unpopular, except on the activist Left.
Still, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre claimed, with no substantiation attempted, that overturning Roe v. Wade was an “unconstitutional action.” But most court critics don’t argue about constitutionality. They simply don’t like the results of the rulings.
Americans have politicized the court through failure to understand its role and purpose. Commentators commonly characterize justices as liberal or conservative, implying their personal ideologies are the legitimate basis of their judicial opinions. Sometimes they’re even referred to as Democrat or Republican.
Indeed, Barack Obama, himself a former constitutional law professor, wanted his Supreme Court nominees to “understand that justice isn’t about some abstract legal theory. ” Rather, they should have “empathy…understanding and identifying with peoples’ hopes and struggles. ”
But as the late Justice Antonin Scalia pointed out, there are fundamentally two grounds for federal court rulings: the text of the constitution and laws or…what? Ideological chaos where ultimately the personal opinions of the judges prevail.
Americans not only tolerate this practice, they demand it. Partisans fully expect the court to protect their ideological interests, to be their backup when the legislative process fails to produce the desired results.
Thus another critic claims the current court is deemed to have rogue status because it “acted under conservative control, as if it stands above the constitutional system, unaccountable to anyone other than itself.” But the court by design is not supposed to be “accountable” to the political process.
Justices don’t face elections precisely so that they can be an independent third branch. They are free to protect minority rights and serve as a check against populist excesses in the democratically elected branches.
In return for their independence, judges bear a solemn responsibility to follow the Constitution. Any other course leads to government by black-robed tyrants not subject to any checks or balances.
In our cancel culture, justices have been seriously threatened with physical harm. Leftist politicians have proposed structural reforms like packing the court, blowing it up, or ignoring it. But these are dangerous threats to the rule of law.
Those unhappy with the current court’s decisions should utilize the traditional means available to effect change. Amend the constitution, change the laws, appoint new judges when the time comes.
An independent judiciary is a hallmark of all successful democracies. Attempts to punish and threaten judges for their decisions is the real threat to our republic.
Published in Law
Yes.
What can one answer to total lunacy? The statements quoted go beyond absurdity. Whether those people making them really believe what they are saying or simply blowing smoke seems difficult to ascertain. Either they are delusional or stupid, or, perhaps, both. Unfortunately, so long as we allow the Left to control education of our children, these kinds of abominable lies will likely go unchallenged since so few receive anything resembling the Civics classes I took in 7th Grade.
I think the Left is married to hyperbole, an intimate validator that meets every need to excoriate enemies and conduct farcical shows. The romance is pathetic and tiresome.
Education is the problem. People don’t understand the system of government we have. No doubt, the professors mentioned could pass the “Constitution Test” I took in the 60s in California, but they long ago forsook instruction for revolution. It is what Communists do.
When the Court went rogue and started creating “rights” that had no basis in law, we didn’t try to overthrow anything. We worked for fifty years to get to where we are today. We worked within the law, and we finally succeeded.
The left only got their way by ignoring law, so now they see no reason to follow law to resume their control over us.
The Supreme court is one of the institutions that must either be done away with or substantially altered for the revolution to succeed. Little wonder they are attacking it now. I am pretty sure they (the left) see the project as almost complete. Pretty soon by their lights we will have the one party totalitarian state of their dreams (and our nightmares).
Barack Obama was no “professor” – he was a part-time lecturer.