No amount of pumping iron or stretching out will ever help you weather a swift kick in the nuts, let alone repeated blows in rapid succession.
America’s supreme court is on a roll. After a week in which it scrapped women’s constitutional right to an abortion and gave an expansive interpretation of gun rights, it has issued yet another momentous ruling—one that will have far-reaching consequences for the government’s ability to curb the greenhouse-gas emissions that are heating the planet.
That’s why I can simultaneously be completely unsurprised by the Supreme Court’s string of catastrophic rulings and as mentally prepared for them as it’s possible to be, and still be doubled over in howling pain.
It’s hard to choose which blow hurt the most. A mass elementary school shooting followed by a major prohibition on regulating gun ownership? Watching the right reap their reward for hijacking a Supreme Court seat from President Obama and hypocritically rushing to replace Ruth Bade Ginsburg on the court by overturning Roe v. Wade? Or seeing them defang the federal government’s ability to address climate change?
It’s straight despair built on despair, made all the worse by the fact that nothing can really be done about any of it.
I see people lashing out, which is understandable, and blaming various Democrats for being ineffectual, but I have to confide in you that I’ve known all this was coming in roughly the terms that it has now arrived, and I’ve known it for a long time. And a lot of this is done to dumb chance.
A bad ballot design in Palm Beach County, Florida delivered the 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush. Antonin Scalia dying too late and Ginsburg dying too soon, delivered two more seats on the Court to the Republicans. An idiotic letter from James Comey perhaps led to two additional seats (in addition to the Ginsburg one) to the Republicans.
I’ve been torn apart knowing that today’s America was coming and that a lot of it wasn’t something that could be avoided.
Relatedly, my entire analysis of the 2020 primary between Biden and Sanders was based on the realization that the real president would be Joe Manchin, and I told you this until it got boring. That was the least fun analysis I’ve ever had to spoon out, precisely because it was based on a realistic nihilism.
The way odds work, we’re due for some good fortune for a change. I’m hoping we get some, because there ain’t a whole lot else that can give us a productive path forward. We lost a long time ago, and people didn’t understand it at the time. Now they’re all waking up, but it’s too late. In some ways, we never had a chance.
Part of me just wants to hang it up and pass the baton to someone with more optimism and will to continue, but I know I have some reserves somewhere, if I can just get a moment to gather myself and find them.
The only silver lining is that these rulings are very poorly done. Mis-state key facts. Claim history has your guide, then use an ahistorical analysis to achieve your goals (and that’s being kind). Etc.
Majority opinions written to get the “Gentleman’s C”, because they can.
They will be overturned. Though overturning them will be easier than restoring the damage done to the Court by them.
Just to clarify, they won’t be overturned because they’re poorly written. They’ll be overturned when and if Democrats regain a working majority on the Court.
If there’s one thing that distinguishes these rulings as a whole it’s the extent to which they’re a simple exercise in raw political power. “We have the votes so we can do it.” When pre-Civil War abolitionists talked about “the Slave Power”, they had decisions like this in mind (e.g., Dred Scott).
The simplest (not necessarily easiest, but simplest) way for Democrats to regain a majority on the Supreme Court is to expand the size of the Court (e.g., to 13, with the rationale that there are 13 federal circuits so there should be one justice for each) and fill the seats. That could be accompanied with other reforms—limiting the number of years justices can serve, setting a rotation of terms that ensures each president gets to appoint justices, limiting the Court’s powers, etc.).
True that.
Term limits would need a constitutional amendment. But setting the standard that each presidential term gets two nominations could be done, and vote for confirmation must be done within a month of nomination or assent will be assumed.
I don’t agree that nothing can be done. After all, how many divisions does John Roberts have?
This court’s majority have declared themselves the head of a dictatorship and will continue to rule by decree (the only remaining avenue the right wing has to impose its agenda) until somebody tells them to stuff it. The only thing legitimizing this court is our own acquiescence.
Governor Hochul already missed her chance. Instead of ignoring the majority decision nullifying New York’s gun laws, or even accepting the dissent as case law, she chose to waste everyone’s time by working up a new law that will get tossed at the next right wing challenge in court.
Perhaps Governor Newsom will do something when the court throws out California’s auto emissions law. California has the economic power to continue enforcing its emissions laws no matter what the court rules. If Newsom stands up to the court, he will be a national hero and could find himself on the short list for president in 2024. He would not be creating a constitutional crisis. He would be initiating an end to one.
More generally, America should view this court’s decisions the way Republicans view the Constitution; as a smorgasbord where we can select the things we want and leave everything else under the sneeze guard.