This HERETIC “court” has violated the confidence and trust of the American people. More and more, especially after July, 2022, Americans see the HERETIC Roberts “court” as a “kangaroo court. Their track record of using cases to accomplish ideological goals; the increasingly common comment of a “court” that is “on a mission”; the questions of “why are they accepting this case?”; brings this “court” more into disrepute; threatens the VERY IDEA of “justice”; builds questions of “is this really a “supreme court” from the shabby opinions issued – as in is THIS the best “legal reasoning” that America can produce???
1] Erwin Chemerinsky: “The Conservative Assault on the Constitution”
— “The assault on the constitution is the result of a concerted effort by conservatives to alter fundamental constitutional principles. The focus needs to be not just on the courts, but also on the policies developed during the presidencies of Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, and Bush..conservatives have sought to create unprecedented, unchecked executive power..to obliterate the long-standing wall separating church and state..to abolish any constitutional protection for privacy..sought to greatly reduce constitutional protections for criminal defendants..worked to eliminate all affirmative action and to institute a vision of the Constitution that will perpetuate deep racial inequalities..Most successfully, they have closed the courthouse doors…
“The conservative assault on the Constitution is driven not by methodology or interpretive philosophy but by ideology..Justice Scalia professes..he follows the original meaning of the Constitution, but his are the views of the 2008 Republican platform, not of the Constitution’s framers.”
***”Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, for in their opinion fact depends entirely on the power of men who can fabricate it.” [Hannah Arendt]
2] “The Supreme Court Has A Crisis of Trust”, New York Times editorial, 10/2/22
– “The court’s rulings are now in line with the views of the average Republican voter. In the process, the court has unmoored itself from both the Constitution it is sworn to protect and the American people it is privileged to serve..The way the court went about eliminating the federal right to abortion is a prime example of..misuse of its power. First, the right-wing justices used the court’s “shadow docket,”.. to allow an obviously unconstitutional anti-abortion law in Texas to stand. They also agreed to hear a separate challenge out of Mississippi..that didn’t formally ask them to overturn Roe v. Wade..they chose to do so anyway..”
*** “The essential claim of the fundamentalist is that he knows the truth..It is an external truth, brought to him by a book, a sacred text, a mullah, a pope, a guru, a political visionary, or a religious community with an authoritative pastor.” [Andrew Sullivan: “The Conservative Soul”]
3]. “Compelled Contributions”, RobBoston, Church and State, October, 2021
– “The case, “Carson v. Malkin,” is sponsored by the “Institute for Justice,” a libertarian organization that has long sought to erode public education and other government provided services…The new legal tussle comes during a time when the Supreme Court has been redefining “religious freedom” in troubling ways [Zelman, Trinity, Espinoza]..The parents are essentially asserting that without taxpayer support, they can’t fully practice their faith. There was a time when such a stance would have been laughed out of the Supreme Court.”
***North Carolina Constitution, 1776, Articles XXXIV: “..there shall be no establishment of anyone religious church or denomination in this State..either shall any person, on any pretense whatsoever, be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith..nor be obliged to pay, for the purchase of any glebe, or the building of any house of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes right..”
not “ON ANY. PRETENSE. WHATSOEVER ” – forced to support another person’s religion, in any way. PERIOD.
4]. “R.I.P. the Establishment Clause,” Nicholas J. Little, Free Inquiry, October/November, 2020
– in Espinoza, the Montana Department of Revenue ruled the state’s no-aid program prohibited vouchers subsidizing education in religious schools. The Montana Supreme Court struck down the entire program. “No program..existed that discriminated against religion. No student or school was in a worse place because of their religious identification..Yet the Supreme Court not only took up the case, it ruled that the scholarship program must be reinstated and must permit religious schools to participate..at a stroke, ruled the no-aid provision of thirty-eight states unconstitutional..The decision took standing law – the baseline requirement..an individual must have an active dispute causing real harm to proceed in court – and threw it out..To reach the decision the Court wanted..it accepted a case with no active dispute..there were no victims.” [this is called USING CASES TO REACH DESIRED IDEOLOGICAL GOALS]
*** “When a religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and when it cannot support itself..it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.” [Benjamin Franklin, 10/9/1780]
5]. “The Court’s Third Great Crisis”, Garrett Epps, Washington Monthly, November/December, 2022
– “..the Court granted review in a North Carolina case that would give the conservative majority a chance to begin to establish a principle Texas..tried to use to overturn the 2020 election..”independent state legislature”..can decide elections..A second granted case presents a chance to cut back drastically on the remaining protections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. A third set of cases affords the Court the chance to achieve a long-held conservative aim of eliminating “affirmative action” programs in college admissions.
“..the partisan lineup..the aggressive tone of the majority’s opinions..the willingness of the conservative justices to lend themselves to seemingly partisan organizations, events, causes; the ostentatious disregard by Clarence Thomas of even the most basic norms of impartiality – all of these resemble nothing so much as the workings of a legislative branch of government..Our Supreme Court is now something akin to the Guardian Council that ensures religious conformity within the..Islamic Republic of Iran.”
[this is called USING CASES TO ACHIEVE DESIRED IDEOLOGICAL GOALS – like the Guardian Council of another
“republic” that claims to be “democratic”]
***”A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecasts, no hints, for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case, it would display disdain for the entire judicial process.” [R.B. Ginsburg, Senate confirmation hearing]
6]. Erwin Chemerinsky: “The Case Against The Supreme Court”
– “Citizens United”.. significantly changed the American political system..on June 29, 2009, the Court on its own, asked for a new briefing..None of the parties to the case has asked the Court to consider this constitutional issue..Justice Stevens wrote a lengthy dissent, vehemently disagreeing with every aspect of the majority decision…
“There is much that is deeply disturbing about this case..the premise that spending money is pure speech is dubious..spending money is conduct..the premise that corporations should have the same speech rights as individuals is just wrong..no evidence..the framers of the First Amendment meant to protect corporations or campaign spending..Citizens United was stunning for its judicial activism.”
[this is called. USING CASES TO ACHIEVE DESIRED IDEOLOGICAL GOALS]
*** “We can either have a democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few. But we cannot have both.” [Justice Brandeis]
7]a] “Limitations of Statute”, Marcia Brown, Washington Monthly, July-August, 2022
– “These attacks on “Chevron” represent the culmination of a decades-long effort by conservatives..to achieve..the “deconstruction of the administrative state”.. Conservatives have executed a strategy to delegitimize and derail the system by which federal agencies produce rules and regulations. They have built an archipelago of independent-funded think tanks and university-affiliated institutions to cast doubt on individual regulations and the rule-making apparatus in general. When, in power, they have slashed funding and staff to agencies and wielded cost-benefit analysis in ways that emphasize the supposed cost of regulations and minimize the possible benefits. And Republicans have, for decades, prioritized supplying a steady stream of anti-regulatory judges to the federal bench.”
7]b] “Race Has Role In Major Cases Before Justices”, Adam Liptak, New York Times, 10/3/22
– “The court has near-total power to decide which cases it will hear, and it often uses discretion to resolve disputes among lower courts. The court agreed to hear many of the major cases in the coming term despite lack of such conflicts, an indication that the new majority is pursuing an agenda and setting the pace of change.”
7]c] “The court, restraining bureaucrats, stages its own power grab”, Noah Feldman, Bloomberg Opinion, 7/5/22
– “The bad news is that, using the superseding doctrine of “major questions” as a workaround, courts unsympathetic to agency action now have a tool to overturn administrative regulations rather than deferring to the agencies. To make matters worse, “major question” doctrine could easily be understood as a further step toward eventual abolition of the “Chevron” doctrine.”
7]d] “Major Victory in Long Game to Dismantle Business Regulations”, Charlie Savage, New York Times, 7/1/22
– “The Supreme Court ruling in the Environmental Protection case..was a substantial victory for libertarian-minded conservatives who have worked for decades to curtail or dismantle modern-style government regulation of the economy..a decision whose implications go beyond hobbling the government’s ability to fight climate change. Many other types of regulations might now be harder to defend. The ruling widens an opening to attack a government structure that, in the 20th century, became the way American society imposed rules on businesses..For decades, wealthy conservatives have been funding a long-game effort to hobble the system.”
*** “Only governments and..courts remained as sources of authority, if enacted Charles’s “libertarian policies would eliminate these.”…”He was driven..to smash the one thing left in the world that could discipline him: government.” [Clayton Coppin]
“..our movement must destroy the prevalent statist paradigm” [Charles Koch, 1978 “Libertarian Review” article]
There is much in the above evidence [ a small fraction of the mountain of evidence] that should frighten YOU. The wealthy “conservatives” want to dismantle a government system of rules that exists, is meant, to protect YOU against the 1865-2023 corporate track record of doing ANYTHING, including murder, to maximize their profits. The Heretic Roberts “court” is a culmination of those efforts. The Roberts court is THE SINGLE MOST ‘BUSINESS-FRIENDLY ‘supreme court’ since 1945 – which is a major reason why they’re in power. No other modern “court” has attempted to RADICALLY change the course of 1901-2004 American history, society, government as this “court” has.
***July, 2022, Justice Sotomayor: “A restless and newly constituted court..continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the Framers fought to build.”
*** July, 2022, Justice Kagan: “The Court appoints itself – instead of Congress or the expert agency – the decision-maker on climate policy. I cannot think of many things more frightening.”
With Justice For All 