If you listen to “the media,” and that’s a mistake- unless you’re trying to suss out what the truth is by checking out the opposite of whatever they say- you’d think the US Supreme Court is this wildly partisan thing. Not so much, as you’d rightly have guessed.
All this talk about packing the court with enough liberal justices to make the Constitution say what they want is based on an entirely false assumption. That the number of so-called conservative justices is being fringe and the court is skewed.
Perception is powerful, and the radical left sways its faction more easily than a breeze blows a dandelion seed across the yard. But what grows isn’t even a pretty weed, and the truth isn’t stranger than fiction; it’s just the truth.
It is a too-little-known fact that 44 percent of cases that come before the Supreme Court are decided unanimously. When you include nearly unanimous cases—those decided by 8–1 and 7–2 margins—that figure jumps to over 60 percent. It is also common for liberal and conservative justices to vote with colleagues on the opposite end of the ideological spectrum. In a case this year, for example, conservative Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh joined liberal Justices Sotomayor and Jackson in the majority decision, while liberal Justice Kagan joined Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett in the dissent.
60% are decided by 7-2 votes or better, and if we excused the Dumb Justice, DEI hire Ketanji Brown Jackson, for whom her own liberal buddies have quiet concerns, the number would be even higher.
If your Justices, who are widely different and divided not just on what the Constitution says and means but how relevant it is to their roles, can agree nearly 7 times in ten, the body can hardly be claimed to be partisan.
Liberal justices from Stephen Breyer to Elena Kagan have refuted claims that today’s Court is a partisan institution. Justice Kagan, as reported in Politico, spoke recently on this topic and “reject[ed] claims that the high court’s conservative majority is in President Donald Trump’s corner.” The fact is that the ongoing enthusiasm for packing or eliminating the Supreme Court is based less on the voting records and views of the justices than on the idea, as Senator Warren put it, that the Court should follow what she perceives as “widely held public opinion.”
Warren is a threat to the Republic but in typical fashion. She’s all in favor of mob rule and public opinion when she thinks it’s leaning in her favor. You’d be hard-pressed to get here to agree that an electoral whomping and losing every swing state could be understood to be public opinion.
Rather, the results are framed as chaos and disorder, as if they are not legs on the socialist stool, tied together by violence. The very thing she and her party leaders encourage from people who, misled by leadership, do the dirty work and assume the consequences.
Makes for good television and sells the narrative, but if Democrats stopped making it messy, there’d be none of the chaos or disorder they blame on Trump.
And the problem isn’t a partisan court, or even the left being the left; it’s that there are not enough Americans acting like the guy they elected to dismantle the deep state. Trump doesn’t need them, and neither do you. If more people lived their lives and voted accordingly, we wouldn’t have enough Democrats in office to encourage all this nonsense.
And be mindful. If Democrats do get the power they need, they will do whatever it takes, as quickly as possible, to ensure that the bloated, corrupt, ever-expanding unelected bureaucratic state is protected not just from Republican majorities or presidents, or the Supreme Court, but from you.
