Is the Judicial Branch now a Political Branch

There are plenty of issues he could have invoked to make the case that the judiciary is politicized--as they start out with gerrymandering. Invoking the reversal of Roe v. Wade however, seems rather counterproductive--well, that is, if the grievance was actually about the politicization of the judiciary. Of course it was not--it's just a construct to attack their position on abortion, which he (the author) disagrees with.

Let's take a look at one of the grievances:

More troubling is this court’s decision to infuse its proceedings with expressions of individual justices’ personal beliefs. At oral argument, Chief Justice Muñiz, referring to the unborn, proclaimed to counsel:
...

What you call the prenatal development of a human offspring––whether fetus, unborn child or “human being”––depends on your very personal view of religion, morals, philosophy, and science. We expect that one using the phrase “human being” is inclined to impart legal rights to the unborn rather than one using the phrase “unviable fetus.” The Chief Justice could easily have used the neutral term “unborn.” His choice of words appears to serve no other purpose than to broadcast his own personal beliefs and opinions. The Chief Justice is, as we all are, entitled to his very personal views. But needlessly declaring them in these proceedings imparts the impression that his decision-making is being driven by those beliefs.​

A "prenatal development of a human offspring"? What??

That IS a human being. A tender state of human being, certainly, but absolutely, without exception, a human being. A genetically complete living organism that is absolutely a human being, to the absolute exclusion of every other species on the planet that exists or has ever existed. Under no circumstances does a human embryo develop into anything but a more mature state of human being. Under no circumstances, can it morph into a cockroach, a fish, a dog, a bear, a worm.... It is human, and human it shall ever remain, however much anyone desires to stick their fingers in their ears and sing la la la, bury their head in the sand or otherwise pretend it's something other than human.

Yet he seems to suggest that refer to a human being as such, is somehow political? That it ought to be referred to as a "prenatal development of a human offspring"?

NB: an umbilical cord is a "prenatal development of a human offspring". An umbilical cord is not a human being. Meanwhile, a complete human embryo, let alone fetus, is pretty much objectively, a human being. Every human ever, was at one point, an embryo.

Over turning Roe might be messy--but the mess was ALWAYS there--just out of sight, behind the veil of privacy. That mess is is part of our democratic process; i.e.--it's subject to the very 'rule of law' he seems to want to skirt, by hiding behind the black robes of hyper judicial activism, as he cries... "judicial activism" (or politicization, as he attempts to phrase it).

Spoiled by Roe, doesn't make the inherently flawed ab initio Roe, good law.

Perhaps desirable law (to some, obviously), but not good law. It was never good law. Even Justice Ginsburg famously conceded as much, and she was hardly a staunch conservative pro-lifer.

We're in the messy stage now, where we would have been in the mid '70's, had the Burger Court not dawned their black robes like superhero capes in '73, and paternalistically sought to insulate us from the mess. So here were are, 50+ years on, picking up where we left off.

TBL: I don't read the letter to be a grievance that the judiciary is politicized--rather, that it is not politicized to the author's liking.

jmho/fwiw.

 

Reminiscent of this old skit…..

 

Yes, they are. Ironically, this isn't a new problem. Congress sought to impeach Samuel Chase, a founding father and a justice appointed by George Washington. Chase, a Federalist, had presided over a Sedition Act case as a judge and basically acted as a prosecutor. It was a case seeking to punish a member of the rival party for speech critical of the Federalist government. Chase made numerous appalling comments during the trial. (The Sedition Act is one of many great affronts to free speech during this country's history.)

All this to say, there is a long history of our judges being partisans. It abated some during the 20th century (they were still ideologues, but not nearly as partisan). It has now returned with a vengeance.

 

Someone needs to start fining or removing judges that appear to believe they are above the law.

'Major national impact': Dozens of federal judges didn’t disclose free luxury trips (msn.com)

NPR's Tom Dreisbach and Carrie Johnson reported that despite judges being expected to file a public report disclosing any events they attended in which their costs of participation were covered by an outside entity, many jurists have failed to do so for months or even years.

"That information loses most of its value if it's a year and a half later," said Kedric Payne, who is the senior director of ethics at the anti-corruption watchdog group Campaign Legal Center. "It's just too distant from the potential conflict of interest."

One of the more notable members of the federal judiciary who failed to file timely disclosure reports is U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon of the Southern District of Florida, whom former President Donald Trump appointed to the bench in 2020. Cannon — who is overseeing Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith's prosecution of Trump in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case — attended several seminars at a luxury resort in Montana, but didn't post her disclosure forms online until NPR's inquiry. Clerk Angela Noble attributed the late disclosure to "technical issues."

Many of the seminars judges attend are funded by well-heeled far-right groups with extreme ideological agendas. NPR reported that "dozens" of federal judges attended a 2022 event at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School — named for the Ronald Reagan-appointed Supreme Court justice — featuring a speech by European Parilament member Gunnar Beck. Beck is with the anti-immigrant Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany, of AfD) party, which has called for the mass deportation of migrants and refugees.

 

ignore is your friend

 

The SC has always been political. It’s just more clear sometimes vs. others. Taney was a slave holder, appointed by Andrew Jackson and wrote the Dred Scott decision.
And by the way, in the category of “huh? What?”, he still has a county named after him in Missouri.

 

Taney also tipped James Buchanan, the President and an ally of his, off about the Dred Scott decision before they released it.

 

The only people that could be shocked by this are people who are like "whah, there's still a confederate memorial day in southern states?" Of course, who learns about Bleeding Kansas now, that would be too woke.

 

Fair points.

All I'm saying is that his approach was transparent and counterproductive.

Attack Roe's reversal and address the abortion issue...

--OR--

Attack politicization of the courts.

Attacking politicization of the courts...by invoking grossest most political action taken from the bench since Dredd Scot...not very convincing.

Begs the question--where was that righteous indignation during Roe's 50 year reign?

Non-existent, I'm sure.

B/c the he agreed with THAT politicization of the judiciary.

 

this has been Putin's goal since Hillary said his election was rigged. djt and MAGA have helped him beyond his wildest dreams to get er done. taking out Hillary while helping djt get elected who then promoted fake election results and fake news was a double win for Putin

can't defeat us from the outside so help us tear ourselves apart from the inside

 

Concur on the strategy. Disagree on the culprit.

My money's on Beijing, and an army of bought and paid for puppets...

 

This...

 

Russia has/had massive false info operations out there dedicated to helping djt, a big Putin fan, get elected. that is not in doubt and has been well documented. Claiming that election results are fake and news is fake is all djt.

 

We know Biden is just the main puppet in the Obama regime. And yes, Obama started this weaponization of the judicial system along with the intelligence apparatus. It all started when Obama combined all the alphabet agencies and coordinated his efforts to go after "rogue" people on the Right.

And the DNC along with Clinton money and the Obama power structure were all complicit in going after a duly elected president, DJT, even before he won the presidency over Hilary Clinton.

 

A today example of our two-tiered justice system:

Alvin Bragg Silent On Whether Pro-Palestinian Protestors Who Occupied Columbia University Will Face Charges (msn.com)

Hang the conservatives. Free the criminals. New York's finest climbed ladders and broke windows to get in the building to stop the illegal occupation risking life and limb. Alvin Bragg is going to release students and non-students and eventually expunge the whole event.

This is the crapola you democrats vote for at every level of government. It's no wonder we will never see eye to eye on anything.

 

If they broke any laws, they should be charged and prosecuted.

 

So on the bacon, if they broke laws they should not be charged? WTF?

 

Also, you support a guy who enacted a conspiracy to overturn a Presidential election, which included a violent component where over 100 police were injured during an attack on the Capitol Building.

So there's also that....

 

If Trump enacted the conspiracy which he did not, you'd be right. However, you are filled with too much TDS to be able to see the truth.

The truth in short version:

Trump Explicitly Exhorts Marchers to Proceed 'Peacefully and Patriotically' on January 6, 2021 (youtube.com)

There is the question of today. Do you support law breakers at Columbia being released without charges by Alvin Bragg?