Op-Ed: Are Supreme Court justices 'partisan hacks'? All the evidence says yes

Op-Ed: Are Supreme Court justices 'partisan hacks'? All the evidence says yes (via @latimesopinion)

9/19/2021 2:48:00 PM

Op-Ed: Are Supreme Court justices 'partisan hacks'? All the evidence says yes (via latimesopinion)

Time and again the court’s Republicans have issued decisions strongly favoring the GOP in the electoral process. That's not a coincidence.

PrintIf Supreme Court justices don’t want to be seen as “partisan hacks,” they should not act like them.In a speech last week at the McConnell Center at the University of Louisville Law School,Justice Amy Coney Barrett said, “This court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks.” She added, “Judicial philosophies are not the same as political parties.”

Aaron Sorkin Hopes People Will ‘Pay Less Attention to Twitter’ After Watching ‘Being the Ricardos’ NASA introduces the new astronaut class of 2021 Three Potential Crises Unfold on the World Stage

Setting aside the irony of uttering these statements at an event honoring Sen. Mitch McConnell, who blocked the confirmation of Merrick Garland to the court and rushed through the confirmation of Barrett precisely because of their ideologies, the reality is that time and again the court’s Republican majority has handed down decisions strongly favoring Republicans in the political process.

Does Barrett really expect people to believe that is a coincidence?AdvertisementIn the same speech, Barrett reiterated that she is an originalist, one who believes that the Constitution must be interpreted to mean what it might have meant at the time it was adopted. Yet not one of the court’s decisions about the election process favoring Republicans can possibly be defended on originalist grounds, which shows how wrong her claims really are. headtopics.com

In a series of rulings, with all of the Republican-appointed justices in the majority and the Democratic-appointed justices dissenting, the court has strongly tilted the scales in elections in favor of Republicans. In 2010, in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, the court ruled 5 to 4 that corporations can spend unlimited amounts to get candidates elected or defeated.

Business interests, which overwhelmingly favor Republican candidates in their campaign expenditures,outspend unionsby more than 15 to 1. There is no plausible argument that the original meaning of the 1st Amendment included a right of corporations to spend unlimited amounts in election campaigns. Neither political expenditures nor corporations, as we know them today, even existed at the founding of this country.

In decisions in 2013 and this year, the court’s conservative majority eviscerated the protections of the 1965 Voting Rights Act in a manner that helps Republicans and hurts voters of color and Democrats. In 2013, in Shelby County vs. Holder, the court, 5 to 4, nullified the law’s requirement that states with a history of race discrimination get preclearance before making a significant change in their election systems. Every one of these states where preclearance was required was controlled by Republicans.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority and said that Congress violated the principle of equal state sovereignty by not treating all states the same. Nowhere is that found in the Constitution — and it was certainly not the understanding when the 14th Amendment was adopted by a Congress that imposed Reconstruction, including military rule, on Southern states. headtopics.com

New trial ordered for Black man whose jury deliberated in room with Confederate flag Dancing Grannies make inspiring parade return 'Real Housewives' Dorit Kemsley's Husband, PK, Arrested for DUI

After the Shelby County case, Republican-controlled governments in states like Texas and North Carolina immediately put in place restrictions on voting that had been previously denied preclearance.In July, the court, now with six Republican appointees, gutted another crucial provision of the Voting Rights Act. Section 2 prohibits state and local governments from having election systems that discriminate against minority voters. Congress amended this provision in 1982 to provide that the law is violated if there is proof of a racially discriminatory impact.

The case,Brnovich vs. Democratic National Committee, involved two provisions of Arizona law that the United States Court of Appeals found had a discriminatory effect against voters of color. But Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the Republican-appointed justices, imposed many requirements that will make it very difficult, if not impossible, to prove a violation of the Voting Rights Act.

AdvertisementHe said, for example, that courts must consider whether the new restrictions are worse than what existed in 1982 when the law was amended, all other ways for people to vote, and the state’s interest in preventing fraud. For any restriction on voting, a court can now say it isn’t as bad as some that existed earlier, or that there are enough other ways to vote, or that the state’s interests are enough to justify the law. In her dissent in Brnovich, Justice Elena Kagan noted there’s new evidence that “the Shelby ruling may jeopardize decades of voting rights progress.”

Conservative justices, who say they focus on the text of the law in interpreting statutes, created limits on the reach of the Voting Rights Act that are nowhere mentioned in it. The result is that the laws adopted by Republican legislatures in Georgia, Florida, Texas and other states are now far more likely to be upheld. headtopics.com

In these and other cases, the Republican justices changed the law to dramatically favor Republicans in the political process. Barrett’s protest against the justices being seen as “partisan hacks” rings hollow when that is what they have become. And it is risible to say that “judicial philosophies are not the same as political parties.” I would challenge her to give a single instance where the conservative justices on the court took positions that were at odds with the views of the Republican Party.

The most obvious example, of course, is abortion. The GOP vehemently opposes abortion rights and Republican presidents have appointed justices with that view. No one should have been surprised when the five conservative justices refused to enjoin the Texas law banning abortions after the sixth week of pregnancy even though it blatantly violates the constitutional right to abortion.

Opinion | Robert Dole Dies at Age 98 Anne Frank memorial targeted with anti-Semitic messages during Hanukkah Accuser Says Ghislaine Maxwell Bought Her A Designer Purse After Sexual Encounter With Jeffrey Epstein

AdvertisementSupreme Court decisions always have been and always will be a product of the ideology of the justices. No one — least of all a Supreme Court justice — should pretend otherwise. Read more: Los Angeles Times »

This Wildly Popular Dance of the ’00s Is Back With Bad Bunny

It’s a TikTok challenge waiting to happen.

opinion Justice Thomas' wife paid for domestic terrorist to travel to DC on Jan6th opinion Why is this a Life Time position? opinion Supreme Court Justices are Absolutely partisan hacks, that is why their selection process is so nasty & their voting record so predictable over the years Press covered it up for decades

opinion .Clarence Thomas' wife helped arrange at least 16 busses for GOP Insurrectionists on Jan 6th. He has been making paid speeches for the Koch Brothers and Federalist Society for years! Consistently refuses to recuse himself. OF COURSE he's a PartisanHack! opinion Nobody knows more about being a “partisan hack” than the sports and the opinion

opinion Are the writers and editors at the Newsom Times of El Segundo partisan hacks? All the evidence says yes. opinion It’s is this type of “journalism” that will bring down our country. You plant the seed in readers minds that our institutions are corrupt and need to be completely destroyed. You offer only solutions that will make things worse. The real solution is less of you.

opinion I find it interesting that the two of the most partisan hacks came out this week to defend or more accurately make public statements that their partisan ideology and thinking is non-partisan is telling us more about how partisan they are by their further politicizing the court. opinion Says an opinion piece by a noted liberal partisan hack in a newspaper that’s become dedicated to progressive partisan hackery.

opinion Gee, nobody worked that out in 2000? 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️ opinion The Supreme Court has lost its credibility and status. How arguably,the smartest group on the planet, can support Bounties and Snitches on Women's uteruses is historically dangerous and perverse.

Op-Ed: A trans athlete's guide to writing about trans athletesOp-Ed: A trans athlete's guide to writing about trans athletes (via latimesopinion) opinion horrible

opinion It's dangerous ,when too many in America lose respect or faith in the supreme Court. opinion Tears grips my heart knowing how hard I’ve struggled to find a legit trader.I never wanted to do this but I’ll be guilty if I don’t share this good news to people KayleighGlover0 she the best trader so far.Thanks for helping me and guiding Me through my trade KayleighGlover0

opinion Scotus washingtonpost nytimes TheJusticeDept FBI SpeakerPelosi chuckschumer POTUS They're corrupt-disgusting Donald's tools in Scotus. opinion Not all. But this conservative supermajority has shown they rule from their religion and personal politics, not the rule of law. opinion Partial Justice.

opinion WTF happened to the rule of law? opinion Same with bipartisan ones in SouthAfrica Concourt PresidentZuma. opinion The RepublicanSupremeCourt needs four more justices, Joe. opinion Learn the truth about the vaccines. It’s all on my Twitter page. ⚡️ opinion Of COURSE they are. Any SCOTUS justice who tells you otherwise is a partisan hack.

Op-Ed: Just teach the truth about America's less-than-glorious historyOp-Ed: Just teach the truth about America's less-than-glorious history (via latimesopinion) opinion Tears grips my heart knowing how hard I’ve struggled to find a legit trader.I never wanted to do this but I’ll be guilty if I don’t share this good news to people KayleighGlover0 she the best trader so far.Thanks for helping me and guiding Me through my trade KayleighGlover0

opinion Gee, thanks for that. Where can I get my knife sharpened? opinion thanks

Op-ed: Will China's President Xi’s big bet pay off?Chinese President Xi Jinping is making the most audacious geopolitical bet of the 21st century. They are fucking communist un-American hacks. No doubt about it. He will make it Think it's more about personal legacy and party power. Seems Chinese economic model and influence was already extremely successful as well as controlling, albeit more subtly, prior to these moves. Chinese government showing it's hand may be less effective.

Op-Ed: Bridging the divide between mental health care and addiction treatmentOne diagnosis can eclipse another, leading to a skewed approach. Integrating care and cross-training professionals shows promise. opinion good

Op-Ed: Unvaxxed Nurses Should Not Be Delivering NewbornsOp-Ed: Unvaxxed Nurses Should Not Be Delivering Newborns “These employees are nurses who are charged with caring for new parents and innocent newborns who haven't yet built up their immune system.”

Ed Sheeran reveals he'll be taking baby Lyra with him on tour next yearPop star Ed Sheeran revealed during his appearance on Capital Breakfast on Friday that he was making a highly-anticipated return to the stage with a series of concerts in 2022