Editorial: The day could be approaching when Supreme Court rulings are openly defied

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  lemuel-g  •  one month ago  •  35 comments

By:   STLtoday. com

Editorial: The day could be approaching when Supreme Court rulings are openly defied
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 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

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Revillug
Freshman Guide
1  seeder  Revillug    one month ago

It is time Blue States started disregarding the Supreme Court's deadly rulings on the Second Amendment.

 
 
 
Lucifer Morningstar
Professor Guide
1.1  Lucifer Morningstar  replied to  Revillug @1    one month ago

Sounds like a declaration of Civil War.  That's putting it mildly. 

Perhaps it's time to just get it over with?  You tell me.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Revillug @1    one month ago
It is time Blue States started disregarding the Supreme Court's deadly rulings on the Second Amendment.

Sounds subversive.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
1.2.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2    one month ago

Sounds deadly.  It won't end well for them when they start coming after the 2nd Amendment.  

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.2  devangelical  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.2.1    one month ago

sounds hilarious, when thumpers will have to gear up just to go to church on sunday ...

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
1.2.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  devangelical @1.2.2    one month ago

It's hilarious that so many people are afraid of an inanimate object.  Must be a sad life to lead.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.2.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.2.3    one month ago
an inanimate object.

Corresponds to the thought process of a lot of right wingers. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.5  devangelical  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.2.3    one month ago

... it's now on the precipice of becoming a lot more fun.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @1.2.2    one month ago

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.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2  Mark in Wyoming     one month ago

 so your solution is open sedititon ?

cant wait to see how that works .

 
 
 
Revillug
Freshman Guide
2.1  seeder  Revillug  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @2    one month ago
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.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.1.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Revillug @2.1    one month ago
It will work like disregarding the Federal Government's marijuana laws already works.

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 .

 
 
 
Revillug
Freshman Guide
2.1.2  seeder  Revillug  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @2.1.1    one month ago

And in New York you will go to jail for carrying around deadly guns.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.1.3  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Revillug @2.1.2    one month ago
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 .

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @2.1.3    one month ago

You're not the only truckdriver out there either.

Big man!

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.1.5  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Tessylo @2.1.4    one month ago
You're not the only truckdriver out there either.

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 .

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
2.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @2    one month ago

wouldn't that make a particular current partisan "hearing" moot?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.2.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2    one month ago
wouldn't that make a particular current partisan "hearing" moot?

Right wingers already consider it "moot".

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3  Buzz of the Orient    one month ago
"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."

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.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    one month ago

These lying hypocrites - I cannot believe the power they have.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
PhD Principal
3.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    one month ago

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 Supreme Court nominee’s judicial record suggests he means only that Roe v. Wade hasn’t yet been overturned, not that it can’t be."

"The Supreme Court needs to have the power to overturn "settled" constitutional decisions in order to prevent the permanent entrenchment of terrible precedents."

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.3  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    one month ago

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.  

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    one month ago

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.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.5  Texan1211  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    one month ago

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.

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
3.5.1  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  Texan1211 @3.5    one month ago
Not a one of the Justices said they would never overturn Roe or any other decision.

No, They didn't.

It's really, really, really FUNNY, how Liberal types are so scared by the "Supreme Court" putting the actual "Law Making" back in Federal and State Congress's laps.

What are Liberals so afraid of ......... Big Government ?

But, they always seem to WANT Big Government making all the decisions since Brandon took office. In fact, they keep pressing Big Brandon to complete MORE "Executive Orders" to get what they can't get "Passed Into LAW" !

Wierd !

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.5.2  Texan1211  replied to  magicschoolbusdropout @3.5.1    one month ago

I know, I just get tired of people repeating the same lies over and over and over again---"SCOTUS members lied about abortion!" crapola.

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
3.5.3  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  Texan1211 @3.5.2    one month ago
I just get tired of people repeating the same lies over and over and over again---"SCOTUS members lied about abortion!"

Then they'll turn the other butt cheek and keep complaining and say, over and over and over, that Trump lied, and isn't fit. LMAO !

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4  Tessylo    one month ago

'Fighting for one day': Louisiana abortion clinic still open

SHREVEPORT, La. (AP) — Fielding a call from a woman seeking an abortion , the director of Hope Medical Group for Women tried to answer as best she could.

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.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
5  Sean Treacy    one month ago

Thanks for demonstrating just how hypocritical all the democratic uproar has been about January 6th. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
6  Hallux    one month ago

A Supreme Court defied vs. a Supreme Court deified ... pass the politicised popcorn please.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
7  Nerm_L    one month ago

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.  

 
 
 
Revillug
Freshman Guide
8  seeder  Revillug    one month ago

Blue States hold referendum votes signaling their view of the Supreme Court as illegitimate.

 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.1  Texan1211  replied to  Revillug @8    one month ago
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.

 
 
 
Revillug
Freshman Guide
8.2  seeder  Revillug  replied to  Revillug @8    one month ago
Blue States hold referendum votes signaling their view of the Supreme Court as illegitimate.

For clarity, this should read: "Blue States should hold referendum votes signaling their view of the Supreme Court as illegitimate."

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
9  Greg Jones    one month ago

Uncle Joe is at it  again,  but it's an only an EO

 
 

Who is online


Ender
bugsy
devangelical
MrFrost
Drakkonis


39 visitors