Weekly Opinion Editorial
SNAKE OIL CONCOCTION
by Steve Fair
The
Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) begins a new term on October 3rd. This will be the first term new Justice
Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was appointed by President Biden, will be on the
court. Brown Jackson replaced fellow
liberal Justice Stephen Breyer, who retired in June. A 6-3 conservative majority remains on the
court. The SCOTUS is set to tackle a series
of hot-button issues, including two major election disputes that could impact
the 2024 presidential election.
After the SCOTUS’s ruling overturning Roe
vs. Wade, two of the liberals on the court have went on the road like snake oil
salesmen questioning the legitimacy of the court. Liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia
Sotomayor claims the court’s most result rulings have been political and not
constitutional. “When courts become
extensions of the political process, when people see them as extensions of the
political process trying to impose personal preferences on society,
irrespective of the law, that’s when there’s a problem,” Kagan said this
week in Chicago. Sotomajor said the same
thing the next night in California. Chief
Justice John Roberts responded that justices shouldn’t question the court’s
legitimacy just because they disagree with a ruling. Three observations:
First, every SCOTUS ruling is
political. The definition of political
is: relating to the government or the public affairs of a country. The original Roe vs. Wade ruling was
political. In 1973, spurred by social
liberals, who wanted the government to sanction birth control- after the fact-
the SCOTUS made a political ruling. Every ruling is political and rooted in ideology.
For Kagan and Sotomayor to question the
court’s legitimacy is dishonest. They know
the six justices who voted to overturn the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision hold to
an ‘originalist’ legal philosophy as opposed to their ‘textualism’ view. To cast a shadow over the court’s legitimacy is
the height of political and the ultimate sore loser.
Second, the SCOTUS should not rule based on
public opinion. Every ruling should be
based on the U.S. Constitution. In the
most recent past, that hasn’t been the case because the majority of justices on
the SCOTUS were textualists and believed the Constitution is a ‘living’
document. Textualists contend the
original intent view is out of date/unfashionable. Most SCOTUS textual rulings were made based
on public opinion. Now that’s
political. While it is true, citizens/the
governed should have confidence that SCOTUS rulings are proper and follow the
rule of law, the court should never rule based on public opinion. It should rule based on the founding
document.
Third, liberals are trying to change the
structure of the SCOTUS. Since President
Trump appointed three justices in four years, liberals have come to the
conclusion the SCOTUS needs to change.
Pressured by liberal activists, President Biden appointed a commission
to study ways to change the SCOTUS. The
commission recommended term limits for justices (70 years old max) and expanding
the court. President Franklin Roosevelt tried
the exact same thing in 1937, when conservative SCOTUS justices struck down some
of his New Deal legislation. The plan
failed because Democrats in Congress opposed FDR’s plan- calling it a
politicalizing of the SCOTUS.
Democrats are trying to use the SCOTUS
ruling on Roe Vs. Wade as ammunition against Republicans in the mid-term
elections. They are trying to convince
voters the SCOTUS justices who voted to overturn Roe vs. Wade are partisan political
hacks. They condemn politicization while politicizing. They are double-minded, unstable, vacillating,
and insincere. November will reveal if
Americans brought their snake oil concoction.
No comments:
Post a Comment