Editorial: The day could be approaching when Supreme Court rulings are openly defied
The court’s politicization is no longer something justices can hide. The three most recent arrivals to the bench misled members of Congress by indicating they regarded Roe v. Wade as settled law, not to be overturned. Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife is an open supporter of former President Donald Trump and his efforts to subvert democracy.
The Supreme Court has no police force or military command to impose enforcement of its rulings. Until now, the deference that states have shown was entirely out of respect for the court’s place among the three branches of government . If states choose simply to ignore the court following a Roe reversal, justices will have only themselves to blame for the erosion of their stature in Americans’ minds.
It is time Blue States ignored the Supreme Court's dangerous perversion of the Second Amendment.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The breakdown of U.S. Supreme Court legitimacy may already have begun as the public perception of the court morphs from one of respectful observances of the law as interpreted by the nation’s top judicial scholars to a view of them as little more than political hacks in black robes . Various states, including Missouri, are on record openly defying Congress by effectively ignoring federal legislative mandates. It could be just a matter of time before defiance of the Supreme Court follows the same track.
Various states, including Missouri, already are openly sidestepping federal marijuana laws, legalizing use of the drug even though the federal government outlaws marijuana as a Schedule I drug equivalent to heroin, LSD and methamphetamine. A steady stream of states, starting with Colorado, decided to defy the federal government to the point where federal authorities make minimal efforts to enforce their own laws these days.
Missouri has taken its defiance a step further by asserting a right to forbid police from enforcing any federal gun laws that don’t have a companion Missouri state law. Missouri’s Second Amendment Protection Act has forced local police to cancel cooperative arrangements with federal agencies for fear of losing their state funding if they’re caught helping enforce any semblance of a federal gun law not recognized by Missouri.
This is how quickly federal authority can erode when states decide to go their own way. The U.S. Supreme Court and Congress might be only a few steps away from prompting similar defiance by states that refuse to recognize federal supremacy regarding abortion rights.
After a draft Supreme Court ruling leaked that could overturn abortion rights, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell stated that a Republican-controlled Congress might move to establish a federal ban on abortion. California is already working on a law that would protect anyone involved in an abortion from being extradited if charged in another state for an abortion offense.
“We can’t trust Scotus [the Supreme Court] to protect the right to abortion, so we’ll do it ourselves,” Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom tweeted. “Women will remain protected here.”
The court’s politicization is no longer something justices can hide. The three most recent arrivals to the bench misled members of Congress by indicating they regarded Roe v. Wade as settled law, not to be overturned. Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife is an open supporter of former President Donald Trump and his efforts to subvert democracy.
The Supreme Court has no police force or military command to impose enforcement of its rulings. Until now, the deference that states have shown was entirely out of respect for the court’s place among the three branches of government . If states choose simply to ignore the court following a Roe reversal, justices will have only themselves to blame for the erosion of their stature in Americans’ minds.
Tags
Who is online
80 visitors
It is time Blue States started disregarding the Supreme Court's deadly rulings on the Second Amendment.
Sounds subversive.
Sounds deadly. It won't end well for them when they start coming after the 2nd Amendment.
sounds hilarious, when thumpers will have to gear up just to go to church on sunday ...
It's hilarious that so many people are afraid of an inanimate object. Must be a sad life to lead.
Corresponds to the thought process of a lot of right wingers.
... it's now on the precipice of becoming a lot more fun.
Yeah, I am sure that a large bunch of ragtag idiots are just pining away for a chance to shoot themselves up a bunch of churchgoers not bothering anyone.
Sounds rather progessive, liberal and democratic.
Thank God most of them lack the balls to really DO anything and are content to hide behind their keyboards in mommy's basement.
so your solution is open sedititon ?
cant wait to see how that works .
It will work like disregarding the Federal Government's marijuana laws already works.
Judicial Review isn't in the Constitution. It's just a tradition.
The Supreme Court has made its ruling, now let them enforce it.
LOL and in some states you can still go to jail for a lid or some roaches .... but i do get your point .
So those sedition charges faced by those that stormed the capitol will or should now be considered "low key " and treated like federal pot laws ... gotcha .
And in New York you will go to jail for carrying around deadly guns.
actully not really if one is simply traveling through a state , or anywhere , and it is done in accordance with federal laws and regulations .
besides , i already explained , im not worried about what NYC or NYS thinks they can do , to me as an individual its a no go /no stop place to pass through . personal choice .
not a big deal really for me , i just pick the shortest route between state lines and go .
its not even really a big deal for you , until you find out , i also hold a CDL and drive a semi . In the case of me working , I DO get to pick and choose loads depending on where they go ,what they are , and where they drop off . like i said , i get to choose where is a no go / or a just drive through with no stopping to pick up or drop off .
and dont think im the only one that thinks or does that ....i know im not . you need the product more , than i need the money .
You're not the only truckdriver out there either.
Big man!
True.
but i didnt make that claim either
what i DID say is i am not the only driver that thinks that they can pick and choose where to make drop offs and pick ups , and i am not the only one that makes those choices . its been claimed for years that the trucking industry is short by between 70 and 80,000 qualified drivers , part of it is federal and state regulation as reasons for that shortage
ever thing used by people today , gets to them in the back of a truck, trucks stop rolling , or drivers start to choose not to go certain places , how long before the day to day lives of the people in those places start to be affected ?
one can have the product , have the money to buy the product , but without being able to get that product where its to be sold and utilized , it doesnt matter now does it , it sits and rots or waits on a loading dock or is so far behind schedule it makes no difference .
wouldn't that make a particular current partisan "hearing" moot?
Right wingers already consider it "moot".
This is what troubles me the most, and I don't know how any American can be proud of such a judiciary, but then it appears that lack of integrity is commonplace among a lot of politicians as well.
These lying hypocrites - I cannot believe the power they have.
Perhaps this will help you out. And there wasn't anyone who said "not to be overturned" that I recall nor find in searches.............
The lying freaking hypocrites - including that lying traitor to women Coney-Barrett, Gorsucks, TT, Kavanaugh (the whiny little bitch) and the other lying hypocrite - why can't they be impeached for lying and denying women's rights to their own bodies/autonomy. Scum.
Probably shouldn’t be troubled by imaginary things.
They gave generic statements about precedent and then voted to overturn one. JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER JUSTICE HAS THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS.
the only people who claim the Justices lied are unfamiliar with the basics of a legal system and can’t follow arguments that even hint at being complex or is someone trying to take advantage of those simpletons for political gain.
Misled is definitely the wrong term.
Not a one of the Justices said they would never overturn Roe or any other decision.
Nominees for SCOTUS never really answer how they would rule on any hypothetical case or any case actually before the Court.
These claims that Justices lied are, well, LIES themselves.
I know, I just get tired of people repeating the same lies over and over and over again---"SCOTUS members lied about abortion!" crapola.
'Fighting for one day': Louisiana abortion clinic still open
Yes, federal protections for abortion had been overturned, she said. The clinic was still open — but there's a waiting list and a court hearing on Friday that could change everything, she added.
“We are still fighting,” clinic administrator Kathaleen Pittman told the woman before hanging up Wednesday.
By Pittman's own description, you have to be an optimist to work in abortion services. Now, with confused patients calling for help and a looming court date threatening to put an end to almost all abortions in the state, that optimism is being tested like never before.
For years, Louisiana's abortion clinics have operated under increasing layers of restrictions designed to limit who can get an abortion and when. Then the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that provided federal protection for abortions, leaving the decision up to individual states.
Like many states Louisiana has a trigger law designed to immediately halt abortions if Roe is overturned. But nearly two weeks after the June 24 ruling, the Shreveport clinic was still open and providing abortions to patients from all over Louisiana, as well as states like neighboring Texas and Mississippi.
The clinic filed for a temporary restraining order to allow the state’s three clinics to remain open, arguing that multiple trigger provisions in the law make it unclear exactly when the ban takes effect, and that the law’s medical exceptions are unclear.
Thanks for demonstrating just how hypocritical all the democratic uproar has been about January 6th.
A Supreme Court defied vs. a Supreme Court deified ... pass the politicised popcorn please.
How is any of this different than states attempting to defy limits on Federal SALT deductions?
The danger of autocratic central government is totally unimportant -- until its not. And then it's too late. A do-nothing Congress has been utilizing the courts to change the Constitution in a back handed, undemocratic manner. We've known for decades that both parties have been attempting to control the courts to impose party priorities onto the country in an autocratic (totalitarian?) manner. Attempting to control the courts is an undemocratic expedience and, certainly, not a way to protect and defend the Constitution or our representative democracy. That expedient argument has been built upon the idea that the autocratic courts can be coerced into doing what Congress refuses to do.
We've also witnessed how the executive bureaucracy imposes autocratic mandates onto the county. Those mandates are challenged in the courts and the courts have expanded the autocratic authority of the bureaucracy. That's not representative government. And that's certainly not any type of democratic process. As a result the bureaucracy has become accountable to the courts and not accountable to the President or the people.
People are upset that autocrats aren't doing what they expect. But the reality is that autocrats don't have to; autocrats aren't accountable to the people. The political expediency of relying on autocratic government has rubbed up against reality. And no one in representative government knows what to do.
Blue States hold referendum votes signaling their view of the Supreme Court as illegitimate.
Blue states hold referendums proving that they are run by idiots.
Just sounds much more accurate.
For clarity, this should read: "Blue States should hold referendum votes signaling their view of the Supreme Court as illegitimate."
Uncle Joe is at it again, but it's an only an EO