The issue presented before the Supreme Court in Murthy v. Missouri was simple: does the government have the right to coerce private companies what to say? The answer, even simpler: Of course not! And yet, the Court swung and missed.
Although the judicial branch pretends to remain "Above politics," Supreme Court justices are not indifferent to political tides.
Justice Kavanaugh has sided with the Court's liberal wing on several noteworthy law enforcement and immigration decisions.
Justice Gorsuch, who is widely held to be the best of President Trump's three picks, wrote perhaps the most odious Supreme Court decision of our time - Bostock v. Clayton County, which forced the government to recognize "Gender identity" as a protected class, in the same category as race or sex, under the Equal Protection Clause.
The rulings the Court hands down must be analyzed with a fine-tooth comb; the Court's "Conservative majority" always makes very narrow holdings; this is the expectation for both Fischer and Trump v. United States, where the Court will likely only hand conservatives qualified victories on each.
The repeated failures are symptomatic of a High Court utterly ill-equipped to deal with some of the most important constitutional issues of our time.
What more appropriate a conclusion than by paraphrasing the late Justice Scalia, whose portentous words that ended his dissent in Obergefell v. Hodges can be slightly adapted to be applied, with uncanny pertinence, to the Federalist Society today, as it did then to a Supreme Court drunk off its own pride: With each decision of the Federalist Society that takes from the People a question properly left to them-with each decision that is unabashedly based not on law FedSoc moves one step closer to being reminded of their impotence.
No comments:
Post a Comment