Welp, right here we go once more — with extra ignorance of the function of the USA Supreme Courtroom within the aftermath of the Roe overturn. Solely this time, the idiocy comes from inside SCOTUS, courtesy of Elena Kagan, who on Thursday claimed the legitimacy of the Courtroom is tied to its conformity with public opinion.
Roll that over in your thoughts a few instances.
Foolish me. All this time, I assumed the Supreme Courtroom’s function was that of ultimate arbiter of the legislation, thus making certain the American folks with the promise of equal justice beneath the legislation and, thereby, as guardian of the Structure of the USA of America. What the hell was I considering?
As reported by Reuters, Kagan on Thursday mentioned at a judicial convention in Montana that it might be a “harmful factor for a democracy” if the conservative-majority Courtroom loses the boldness of the American public. Once more, a profoundly ignorant remark.
I’m not speaking about any explicit resolution and even any explicit collection of selections, but when over time the courtroom loses all reference to the general public and with public sentiment, that’s a harmful factor for a democracy.
Uh-huh. Positive, she wasn’t.
No phrase if Kagan has comparable beliefs a couple of liberal-majority Courtroom. [heavy sarcasm]
By the way, Kagan is the one affiliate justice in historical past who didn’t serve on the bench earlier than ascending to SCOTUS. Previous to becoming a member of the Courtroom in 2010, she was the solicitor common of the USA. She was nominated to each positions by Barack Obama. I do know; attempt to management your shock and amazement.
Anyway, right here’s a bit extra enlightenment from the left-wing justice:
Total, the best way the Courtroom retains its legitimacy and fosters public confidence is by appearing like a courtroom; is by doing the sorts of issues that don’t appear to folks political or partisan. [The Court] earns its legitimacy by what it does, by the best way it behaves.
Sarcastically, on this case, Kagan was precisely proper — however not for the explanation she thought.
“Performing” like SCOTUS and “doing the sorts of issues” SCOTUS does — the best way SCOTUS “behaves” is by adhering to the Structure; by objectively decoding the intent of the Founding Doc and its authors; not by kowtowing to the bulk public opinion of the day or to the so-called “progressive” trigger celebre of the time.
Lastly, Kagan revealed her full hypocrisy whereas suggesting there have been instances in historical past when the Courtroom has been “unconstrained and undisciplined” — when justices “actually simply tried to mainly enact their very own coverage or political or social preferences,” including that the present justices ought to guard in opposition to that.
Memo to Elena Kagan: That “guard in opposition to that” thingy is precisely what occurred when Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett in a 5-4 majority overturned Roe — righting a 49-year-old resolution that ought to’ve by no means been made within the first place.
The underside line:
The fact of an Affiliate Justice really believing left-wing groupthink crap like this isn’t solely a disservice to the USA Supreme Courtroom; it’s a disservice to America and the American folks.
And it’s scary as hell.
Associated on Opinion:
Joe Biden’s Response to the Supreme Courtroom Overturning Roe Is Simply as Bizarre and Deranged as Any Biden Speech Ever
MSNBC’s Pleasure Reid Makes Ridiculous Declare About GOP Possession of Ladies as Roe Meltdown Continues
Biden’s Newest Scheme to Present Nationwide Abortion Is Pure Desperation
About Post Author
