Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
As Supreme Court's standing falters, Alito pushes flawed defense
The public approval of the SCOTUS has crashed due the actions of partisan hacks like Alito. The overturning of Roe was not simply a poorly written decision that relied on on 16th century witch hunter but was a rejection of the fundamental premise that American is a land of laws and precedents cannot be overturned just because some partisan hacks have gained control
Alito is a partisan hack and is upset that people are calling him a partisan hack.
Link to tweet
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/supreme-courts-standing-falters-alito-pushes-flawed-defense-rcna49939?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma
When it comes to the U.S. Supreme Courts institutional credibility, center-left justices have been unsubtle in their warnings. For example, in December 2021, during oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization the case that would ultimately serve as a vehicle to overturn Roe v. Wade Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked a memorable rhetorical question.
Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts? she asked. I dont see how it is possible.
Six months later, when the Dobbs ruling was formally released, Sotomayor joined with Justices Stephen Breyer and Elana Kagan, writing in a dissent that the decision undermines the Courts legitimacy.
A couple of weeks ago, Kagan advanced the conversation during remarks at Northwestern University School of Law. When courts become extensions of the political process, when people see them as extensions of the political process, when people see them as trying just to impose personal preferences on a society irrespective of the law, thats when theres a problem and thats when there ought to be a problem, Kagan said.
Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the Dobbs ruling, has heard the concerns and he clearly has a problem with them. The Wall Street Journal reported:
The article did not quote the far-right jurist further I suspect he didnt elaborate though the ambiguity leaves some unanswered questions. If Kagan and others have crossed an important line, what exactly does Alito see as the appropriate consequence? Is he of the opinion that people are free to disagree with the high court, but not question its legitimacy?
Whats more, Alito hasnt exactly presented a defense of the institution. Indeed, in his comments to The Wall Street Journal, he didnt even make an argument, per se. The justices pitch, in effect, is that people shouldnt question the integrity of the court or its members because, well, just because.......
But as The Washington Posts Ruth Marcus explained in a recent column, the justices own rulings have been every bit as important.
When Republican-appointed justices ignore precedents theyd previously said theyd uphold, it undermines the courts legitimacy. When Republican-appointed justices deliver overtly political speeches, it undermines the courts legitimacy. When Republican-appointed justices take aim at fundamental American principles, such as the separation of church and state, in displays of raw power, it undermines the courts legitimacy.
Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts? she asked. I dont see how it is possible.
Six months later, when the Dobbs ruling was formally released, Sotomayor joined with Justices Stephen Breyer and Elana Kagan, writing in a dissent that the decision undermines the Courts legitimacy.
A couple of weeks ago, Kagan advanced the conversation during remarks at Northwestern University School of Law. When courts become extensions of the political process, when people see them as extensions of the political process, when people see them as trying just to impose personal preferences on a society irrespective of the law, thats when theres a problem and thats when there ought to be a problem, Kagan said.
Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the Dobbs ruling, has heard the concerns and he clearly has a problem with them. The Wall Street Journal reported:
In a comment Tuesday to The Wall Street Journal, Justice Alito said: It goes without saying that everyone is free to express disagreement with our decisions and to criticize our reasoning as they see fit. But saying or implying that the court is becoming an illegitimate institution or questioning our integrity crosses an important line.
The article did not quote the far-right jurist further I suspect he didnt elaborate though the ambiguity leaves some unanswered questions. If Kagan and others have crossed an important line, what exactly does Alito see as the appropriate consequence? Is he of the opinion that people are free to disagree with the high court, but not question its legitimacy?
Whats more, Alito hasnt exactly presented a defense of the institution. Indeed, in his comments to The Wall Street Journal, he didnt even make an argument, per se. The justices pitch, in effect, is that people shouldnt question the integrity of the court or its members because, well, just because.......
But as The Washington Posts Ruth Marcus explained in a recent column, the justices own rulings have been every bit as important.
The inflamed public reaction stems also from the fact that the law changed because the courts membership changed. The ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization was the culmination of a political and politicized process to bolster the conservative majority by any means necessary. And this stacked court has time after time, but most flagrantly in overruling Roe v. Wade abandoned normal rules of restraint, twisted or ignored doctrine, and substituted raw power to achieve its desired result.... And this is how the institution undermines its own legitimacy. If the court behaves like just another political body, it loses the only power it has, of achieving public acceptance of its rulings.
When Republican-appointed justices ignore precedents theyd previously said theyd uphold, it undermines the courts legitimacy. When Republican-appointed justices deliver overtly political speeches, it undermines the courts legitimacy. When Republican-appointed justices take aim at fundamental American principles, such as the separation of church and state, in displays of raw power, it undermines the courts legitimacy.
The block of partisan hacks on the SCOTUS have destroyed the legitimacy of the SCOTUS. The best way to respond to this is to GOTV and vote in so many Democrats in the House nd Senate that we can expand the court to neutralize these partisan hacks
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1044 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
As Supreme Court's standing falters, Alito pushes flawed defense (Original Post)
LetMyPeopleVote
Sep 2022
OP
Due to partisan hacks like Alito, the legitimacy of the SCOTUS is in doubt
LetMyPeopleVote
Sep 2022
#2
'Tarnished image': Gallup releases devastating SCOTUS poll - as conservative Justices snipe at Kagan
LetMyPeopleVote
Sep 2022
#3
Walleye
(31,057 posts)1. Well Justice Alito, who leaked the Dobbs decision?
Face it your court has turned into a clown show. And its your fault
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,567 posts)2. Due to partisan hacks like Alito, the legitimacy of the SCOTUS is in doubt
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,567 posts)3. 'Tarnished image': Gallup releases devastating SCOTUS poll - as conservative Justices snipe at Kagan
Partisan hacks like Alito have destroyed the legitimacy of the SCOTUS
Link to tweet
https://www.rawstory.com/tarnished-image-gallup-releases-devastating-scotus-poll-as-conservative-justices-snipe-at-kagans-warning/
"47% trust the judicial branch; previous low was 53%," "40% job approval of U.S. Supreme Court is tied for record low," and "Record-high 42% say Supreme Court is too conservative."
Translated, that means the legitimacy of the court is in question, despite entreaties from Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the Dobbs opinion that discarded nearly five decades of settled law to achieve a desired goal: rescinding the constitutional right to abortion, and with it, quite possibly not far down the road, the constitutional right to contraception, same-sex intimacy, and same-sex marriage.
"'Less than half of Americans say they have a great deal or a fair amount of trust in the judicial branch of the federal government, representing a 20-percentage-point drop from two years ago, including seven points since last year,'" Politico reports, quoting an advanced copy of Gallup's findings.
"This represents a 20-percentage-point drop from two years ago," Gallup's own report reveals, "including seven points since last year, and is now the lowest in Gallup's trend by six points. The judicial branch's current tarnished image contrasts with trust levels exceeding two-thirds in most years in Gallup's trend that began in 1972."
Respect for the Supreme Court was such a non-question that from 1976, when Americans' "trust and confidence" in the nation's highest court stood at 63%, Gallup, it appears, did not even ask the question again in polls again until 1997, when the answer came back at 71%.
Today, under Chief Justice Roberts, it is a mere 47%.
Translated, that means the legitimacy of the court is in question, despite entreaties from Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the Dobbs opinion that discarded nearly five decades of settled law to achieve a desired goal: rescinding the constitutional right to abortion, and with it, quite possibly not far down the road, the constitutional right to contraception, same-sex intimacy, and same-sex marriage.
"'Less than half of Americans say they have a great deal or a fair amount of trust in the judicial branch of the federal government, representing a 20-percentage-point drop from two years ago, including seven points since last year,'" Politico reports, quoting an advanced copy of Gallup's findings.
"This represents a 20-percentage-point drop from two years ago," Gallup's own report reveals, "including seven points since last year, and is now the lowest in Gallup's trend by six points. The judicial branch's current tarnished image contrasts with trust levels exceeding two-thirds in most years in Gallup's trend that began in 1972."
Respect for the Supreme Court was such a non-question that from 1976, when Americans' "trust and confidence" in the nation's highest court stood at 63%, Gallup, it appears, did not even ask the question again in polls again until 1997, when the answer came back at 71%.
Today, under Chief Justice Roberts, it is a mere 47%.
Chainfire
(17,644 posts)4. Make bullshit rulings get bullshit ratings.
It is just that simple asshole.
Ray Bruns
(4,111 posts)5. Hey Alitto, GFY.