Noah Berlatsky, The Independent
Supreme Court justices are political actors, and as such, they sometimes try to justify themselves to the public. They often do this, ironically, by insisting that they have no need or responsibility to justify themselves to the public.
Chief Justice John Roberts unfurled this self-refuting argument once again over the weekend. He did so in a somewhat more strident register than usual, as the Court’s approval has plummeted to a ludicrous historical low of 25 percent.
“If the court doesn’t retain its legitimate function of interpreting the Constitution, I’m not sure who would take up that mantle,” Roberts said in his first public comments since the Supreme Court gutted abortion rights. “You don’t want the political branches telling you what the law is, and you don’t want public opinion to be the guide about what the appropriate decision is.”
There are a number of reasons to be skeptical of Roberts’ sweeping demand for absolute, unquestioned authority over the law and the Constitution. In the first place, many questions about the court’s legitimacy have little to do with public opinion. Reporters keep uncovering more and more evidence that the actions of Ginni Thomas have badly compromised her husband, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Ginni lobbied numerous officials in an effort to get them to illegitimately and illegally overthrow Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory. She also has extensive connections to anti-abortion groups who were working to persuade the Supreme Court to overthrow Roe v Wade. In an honorable, legitimate court, justices with these kinds of familial connections recuse themselves when relevant. Clarence Thomas should not rule on cases involving the 2020 election, Donald Trump, abortion rights, or any other issue involving his wife’s extensive far-right advocacy. But Thomas has never recused himself from cases linked to his wife. Observers can reasonably conclude that the court is not impartial; that it is instead an illegitimate refuge of corruption and partisan hackery.
More broadly, the Supreme Court is appointed by presidents chosen by the electoral college and by the Senate which approves those appointees. But both electoral college and Senate elections are strongly biased in favor of white, rural Republican voters. As a result, the Supreme Court has a 6-3 Republican supermajority, even though Republican presidents have won the popular vote only once in the last 30 years. In 2000, a conservative Supreme Court interfered in a close election and chose a Republican president to perpetuate the court’s own preferred right-wing hegemony.
Again, court-watchers have good cause to look at the unrepresentative court and conclude that it is a partisan institution committed to undermining popular will and subjugating the public to its minoritarian policy preferences.
Roberts’s response is that the popular will and policy preferences are irrelevant, and that you don’t want public opinion or “the political branches telling you what the law is.” This is incredibly arrogant. It’s also false. Obviously, the Founders intended the political branches to tell you what the law is. The power to make law is literally vested in Congress, a political institution. The power to enforce the law is vested in the executive branch, a political institution. The entire point of the democratic system is that democratic political institutions make the law, based in no small part on the preferences of the public, which elects them.
More, the court is itself a democratic institution, subject to politics. Its members are chosen by the political branches. And they are subject to ongoing checks which are supposed to make them accountable to Congress, the executive, and the public. Congress has the power to impeach justices who engage in flagrant ethical violations — as Clarence Thomas has. The president and Congress can also adjust the make-up of the court by adding justices. This is what Franklin D. Roosevelt threatened during his second term, when a reactionary Supreme Court blocked all legislative efforts to address the Great Depression.
The United Supreme Court has on Thursday delivered a controversial 6-3 verdict overturning a 1913 New York law restricting the carrying of handguns in public, saying that it is part of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, forming the basis of fundamental rights. The Second Amendment ratified
Would you like to see more Black and Latino men locked up in prison? How about a shoutout for giving cops more leeway to use force as they see fit, without repercussions? What about that homeless crisis — why not build really big jails and prisons and clean our sidewalks by arresting our way out of the problem?
It’s easy to take for granted one of our country’s greatest strengths: a legal system in which we settle our disputes peacefully in court. We do this without the type of violence, intimidation and threats against judges that occur in too many other countries. That was true until someone leaked a draft opinion
Ever true to its traditions, Official Washington has celebrated its holidays by toasting its successes, and then cruising comfortably into yet another new year. So this is the right time to remind our capital’s cognoscenti that some areas of Washington governance can and must do better in 2023. We can think of three: executive, legislative and
Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan after his historic re-election for a third time has taken two major decisions which reveal that he will not push for his unorthodox economic ideas this time round to tackle the country’s economic crisis, which had faced a 85.5 per cent inflation rate last October and which had come down to 43.7%
Embers from a smoldering scrap wood fire set days earlier outside a home used by a Christian religious communal group along with a sparking power line caused a 2021 Colorado wildfire fanned by high winds that destroyed nearly 1,100 homes and left two people dead, authorities said on Thursday. Authorities spent 18 months investigating
Many immunocompromised and older people are still terrified of COVID. As a transplant infectious disease doctor on the front lines, I understand why. In the first five months of 2023, COVID caused more than 37,000 deaths in the US, a typical toll from the flu in an entire year. Scientists estimate an annual US COVID death rate of at
“Just leave the baby on the street, where you found her.” What if you found a crying human infant alone on the sidewalk and this was what a 911 operator told you to do? It would be unthinkable, right? Yet this is what some animal shelters are instructing people to do if they find kittens outdoors — to leave them there. Some groups are